| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Stas Kelvich <s(dot)kelvich(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: logical decoding of two-phase transactions |
| Date: | 2017-01-31 06:30:15 |
| Message-ID: | CAB7nPqSrk255+zBRL9E97YSMJgBjW_LM60jckPKrnbJot9PELw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 3:29 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 8:52 AM, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> Now, if it's simpler to just xlog the gid at COMMIT PREPARED time when
>> wal_level >= logical I don't think that's the end of the world. But
>> since we already have almost everything we need in memory, why not
>> just stash the gid on ReorderBufferTXN?
>
> I have been through this thread... And to be honest, I have a hard
> time understanding for which purpose the information of a 2PC
> transaction is useful in the case of logical decoding. The prepare and
> commit prepared have been received by a node which is at the root of
> the cluster tree, a node of the cluster at an upper level, or a
> client, being in charge of issuing all the prepare queries, and then
> issue the commit prepared to finish the transaction across a cluster.
> In short, even if you do logical decoding from the root node, or the
> one at a higher level, you would care just about the fact that it has
> been committed.
By the way, I have moved this patch to next CF, you guys seem to make
the discussion move on.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2017-01-31 06:33:05 | Re: patch: function xmltable |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2017-01-31 06:29:45 | Re: logical decoding of two-phase transactions |