From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com> |
Cc: | Rajeev rastogi <rajeev(dot)rastogi(at)huawei(dot)com>, Ants Aasma <ants(at)cybertec(dot)at>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch> |
Subject: | Re: Proposal for CSN based snapshots |
Date: | 2014-05-12 16:25:59 |
Message-ID: | 20140512162559.GA9535@awork2.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2014-05-12 19:14:55 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 05/12/2014 06:26 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> >>>With the new "commit-in-progress" status in clog, we won't need the
> >>>sub-committed clog status anymore. The "commit-in-progress" status will
> >>>achieve the same thing.
> >Wouldn't that cause many spurious waits? Because commit-in-progress
> >needs to be waited on, but a sub-committed xact surely not?
>
> Ah, no. Even today, a subxid isn't marked as sub-committed, until you commit
> the top-level transaction. The sub-commit state is a very transient state
> during the commit process, used to make the commit of the sub-transactions
> and the top-level transaction appear atomic. The commit-in-progress state
> would be a similarly short-lived state. You mark the subxids and the top xid
> as commit-in-progress just before the XLogInsert() of the commit record, and
> you replace them with the real LSNs right after XLogInsert().
Ah, right. Forgot that detail...
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2014-05-12 16:36:23 | Re: Archive recovery won't be completed on some situation. |
Previous Message | Fujii Masao | 2014-05-12 16:23:04 | Re: Archive recovery won't be completed on some situation. |