From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Oliver Jowett <oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com> |
Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Two-phase commit |
Date: | 2005-06-18 16:13:22 |
Message-ID: | 18565.1119111202@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
While cleaning out old mail about two-phase commit, I noticed this
thought from Oliver:
Oliver Jowett <oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com> writes:
>>> Probably the next question is, do we want a database-side timeout on
>>> how long prepared txns can stay alive before being summarily rolled back?
>>
>> That sounds very dangerous to me. You could end up breaking global
>> atomicity if some other resource in the global transaction committed.
> Right. You wouldn't enable it lightly..
> If pg_prepared_xacts had a time-of-preparation column, it would be
> possible to put the timeout policy in an external client. Perhaps that's
> a better solution?
This seems like a good idea to me in any case --- barring objections,
I will add this to the data structures and view.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Fuhr | 2005-06-18 16:29:35 | Re: Login/logout |
Previous Message | Juan Pablo Espino | 2005-06-18 16:11:31 | Login/logout |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stefan Kaltenbrunner | 2005-06-18 16:32:48 | Re: Post-mortem: final 2PC patch |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-06-18 15:41:21 | Post-mortem: final 2PC patch |