Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers

From: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Vinayak Pokale <vinpokale(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Konstantin Knizhnik <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
Subject: Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers
Date: 2016-08-26 16:29:07
Message-ID: CAD21AoA=Zoztzp=81HW7XmZVBzPs_5BvaAVaYZ+D8TiZN2CFxg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 3:13 PM, Ashutosh Bapat
<ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 11:37 AM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 3:03 PM, Ashutosh Bapat
>> <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Masahiko Sawada
>> > <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 1:32 PM, Vinayak Pokale <vinpokale(at)gmail(dot)com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > Hi All,
>> >> >
>> >> > Ashutosh proposed the feature 2PC for FDW for achieving atomic
>> >> > commits
>> >> > across multiple foreign servers.
>> >> > If a transaction make changes to more than two foreign servers the
>> >> > current
>> >> > implementation in postgres_fdw doesn't make sure that either all of
>> >> > them
>> >> > commit or all of them rollback their changes.
>> >> >
>> >> > We (Masahiko Sawada and me) reopen this thread and trying to
>> >> > contribute
>> >> > in
>> >> > it.
>> >> >
>> >> > 2PC for FDW
>> >> > ============
>> >> > The patch provides support for atomic commit for transactions
>> >> > involving
>> >> > foreign servers. when the transaction makes changes to foreign
>> >> > servers,
>> >> > either all the changes to all the foreign servers commit or rollback.
>> >> >
>> >> > The new patch 2PC for FDW include the following things:
>> >> > 1. The patch 0001 introduces a generic feature. All kinds of FDW that
>> >> > support 2PC such as oracle_fdw, mysql_fdw, postgres_fdw etc. can
>> >> > involve
>> >> > in
>> >> > the transaction.
>> >> >
>> >> > Currently we can push some conditions down to shard nodes, especially
>> >> > in
>> >> > 9.6
>> >> > the directly modify feature has
>> >> > been introduced. But such a transaction modifying data on shard node
>> >> > is
>> >> > not
>> >> > executed surely.
>> >> > Using 0002 patch, that modify is executed with 2PC. It means that we
>> >> > almost
>> >> > can provide sharding solution using
>> >> > multiple PostgreSQL server (one parent node and several shared node).
>> >> >
>> >> > For multi master, we definitely need transaction manager but
>> >> > transaction
>> >> > manager probably can use this 2PC for FDW feature to manage
>> >> > distributed
>> >> > transaction.
>> >> >
>> >> > 2. 0002 patch makes postgres_fdw possible to use 2PC.
>> >> >
>> >> > 0002 patch makes postgres_fdw to use below APIs. These APIs are
>> >> > generic
>> >> > features which can be used by all kinds of FDWs.
>> >> >
>> >> > a. Execute PREAPRE TRANSACTION and COMMIT/ABORT PREAPRED instead
>> >> > of
>> >> > COMMIT/ABORT on foreign server which supports 2PC.
>> >> > b. Manage information of foreign prepared transactions resolver
>> >> >
>> >> > Masahiko Sawada will post the patch.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >
>> > Thanks Vinayak and Sawada-san for taking this forward and basing your
>> > work
>> > on my patch.
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Still lot of work to do but attached latest patches.
>> >> These are based on the patch Ashutosh posted before, I revised it and
>> >> divided into two patches.
>> >> Compare with original patch, patch of pg_fdw_xact_resolver and
>> >> documentation are lacked.
>> >
>> >
>> > I am not able to understand the last statement.
>>
>> Sorry to confuse you.
>>
>> > Do you mean to say that your patches do not have pg_fdw_xact_resolver()
>> > and
>> > documentation that my patches had?
>>
>> Yes.
>> I'm confirming them that your patches had.
>
>
> Thanks for the clarification. I had added pg_fdw_xact_resolver() to resolve
> any transactions which can not be resolved immediately after they were
> prepared. There was a comment from Kevin (IIRC) that leaving transactions
> unresolved on the foreign server keeps the resources locked on those
> servers. That's not a very good situation. And nobody but the initiating
> server can resolve those. That functionality is important to make it a
> complete 2PC solution. So, please consider it to be included in your first
> set of patches.
>

Yeah, I know the reason why pg_fdw_xact_resolver is required.
I will add it as a separated patch.

Regards,

--
Masahiko Sawada

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2016-08-26 16:36:30 Re: OpenSSL 1.1 breaks configure and more
Previous Message Tom Lane 2016-08-26 16:28:41 Re: Renaming of pg_xlog and pg_clog