| From: | Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Sullivan <andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: 2-phase commit |
| Date: | 2003-09-29 18:50:56 |
| Message-ID: | 1064861456.61134.105.camel@jester |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> No, I'm not. One needs to decide how to handle the situation where a
> slave database in a 2PC transaction goes away and comes back, for
> whatever reasons that may happen. Since the idea here is to come up
> with ways of handling the failure of 2PC in some cases, we need
> something which notices that members are not playing nice.
Yes, you're right. The part about the member reinitializing lead me to
believe that you were thinking replication (read it as copying data from
source location to bring it back up to speed -- which is not what you
intended).
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2003-09-29 18:56:44 | Re: 2-phase commit |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-09-29 18:36:28 | Re: Alter Table Column Datatype |