| From: | Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Ed L(dot)" <pgsql(at)bluepolka(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, Steven Singer <ssinger(at)navtechinc(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Batch replication ordering (was Re: [GENERAL] 32/64-bit |
| Date: | 2003-04-12 15:27:21 |
| Message-ID: | 3E983059.3CD1517B@Yahoo.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
"Ed L." wrote:
> If the ordering I seek exists via the algorithm I've described, I don't
The right ordering is commit order, because that is the order that
played back serialized (without possible lock conflicts) guarantees the
same tuples hit.
Unfortunately I know of no sure way to tell the commit order. The
max(seqid) per transaction in ascending order would be a good
approximation at least.
Jan
--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com #
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2003-04-12 15:54:58 | Re: Batch replication ordering (was Re: [GENERAL] 32/64-bit |
| Previous Message | Devrim GUNDUZ | 2003-04-12 11:17:49 | Re: How to drop column ? |