| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Rework subtransaction commit protocol for hot standby. |
| Date: | 2008-10-22 20:41:36 |
| Message-ID: | 20709.1224708096@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> It's nothing to do with confusing commit/abort.
> The new way of doing things on commit is to subcommit then commit. This
> sequence is repeated during WAL replay. If we crash, it will try to
> repeat the sequence, so in some cases it will try to set status to
> subcommitted on a transaction already marked as committed.
Hmm, but then why did we not see the same thing before?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2008-10-22 20:58:03 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Rework subtransaction commit protocol for hot standby. |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2008-10-22 20:27:39 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Rework subtransaction commit protocol for hot standby. |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2008-10-22 20:47:02 | Re: Deriving Recovery Snapshots |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2008-10-22 20:27:39 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Rework subtransaction commit protocol for hot standby. |