| From: | Mike Mascari <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: PITR Phase 2 - Design Planning |
| Date: | 2004-04-29 19:14:38 |
| Message-ID: | 4091541E.6080604@mascari.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Thu, 2004-04-29 at 16:09, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
> Perhaps that was the inspiration, but no, I definitely meant a
> CHECKPOINT.
>
> But now you come to mention it, it would be better just to have a
> command that simply wrote a named record to the xlog, so it can
> be searched for later...
>
> COMMENT [IN TRANSACTION LOG] 'starting payroll Feb04'
FWFW,
Oracle's COMMIT syntax has an optional COMMENT specifier which is
used for documenting a distributed transaction. In-doubt
transactions can then be manually committed or aborted by
referencing the transaction associated with the comment. Example:
COMMIT WORK COMMENT 'A complex distributed Tx';
Perhaps there is some common ground between the 2PC implementation
and PITR?
Mike Mascari
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Sullivan | 2004-04-29 19:17:00 | Re: Call for 7.5 feature completion |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2004-04-29 18:53:27 | Re: Call for 7.5 feature completion |