| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Mike Mascari <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com>, Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca>, Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Two weeks to feature freeze |
| Date: | 2003-06-23 04:02:33 |
| Message-ID: | 16136.1056340953@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com> writes:
> The other problem I was missing being addressed is what happens if one
> promised "I can commit" and crashes? Not exactly at the time he crashes,
> but more at the time he restarts? Doesn't he have to restart into
> exactly that state of "I can commit", with all locks in place
Yes, I think he does --- which adds a whole 'nother layer of complexity
and performance penalty to the thing, because all those held locks etc
have to be recorded on disk before you promise to commit.
That part is soluble in theory though, ie, I believe that it can be
done (not efficiently, but it can be done). I don't see what to do
about the no-commit-ack problem.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-06-23 04:06:36 | Re: Two weeks to feature freeze |
| Previous Message | Sean Chittenden | 2003-06-23 04:01:35 | Re: O_DIRECT in freebsd |