Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers

From: Stas Kelvich <s(dot)kelvich(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
To: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Vinayak Pokale <pokale_vinayak_q3(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers
Date: 2017-09-27 10:12:43
Message-ID: 57E465AD-BFE9-45DB-A7EC-DAE88E0A3ED3@postgrespro.ru
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> On 26 Sep 2017, at 12:06, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Based on the review comment from Robert, I'm planning to do the big
> change to the architecture of this patch so that a backend process
> work together with a dedicated background worker that is responsible
> for resolving the foreign transactions.

For what it worth, I rebased latest patch to current master.

As far as I understand it is planned to change resolver arch,
so is it okay to review code that is intended for non-faulty
work scenarios?

Attachment Content-Type Size
fdw2pc_v13.diff application/octet-stream 172.1 KB
unknown_filename text/plain 96 bytes

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Taiki Kondo 2017-09-27 10:41:26 Float value 'Infinity' is cast to numeric 1 on Windows
Previous Message Jeevan Chalke 2017-09-27 10:12:29 Re: Partition-wise aggregation/grouping