Re: logical decoding of two-phase transactions

From: Stas Kelvich <s(dot)kelvich(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
To: Stas Kelvich <s(dot)kelvich(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
Cc: Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: logical decoding of two-phase transactions
Date: 2017-03-28 00:50:28
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> On 28 Mar 2017, at 00:19, Stas Kelvich <s(dot)kelvich(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
> * It is actually doesn’t pass one of mine regression tests. I’ve added expected output
> as it should be. I’ll try to send follow up message with fix, but right now sending it
> as is, as you asked.

Fixed. I forgot to postpone ReorderBufferTxn cleanup in case of prepare.

So it pass provided regression tests right now.

I’ll give it more testing tomorrow and going to write TAP test to check behaviour
when we loose info whether prepare was sent to subscriber or not.

Attachment Content-Type Size
logical_twophase.diff application/octet-stream 54.4 KB
unknown_filename text/plain 97 bytes

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Craig Ringer 2017-03-28 00:50:56 Re: logical decoding of two-phase transactions
Previous Message Lukas Fittl 2017-03-28 00:45:12 Re: [PATCH] Use $ parameters as replacement characters for pg_stat_statements