Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: 7.4.5 losing committed transactions

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: 7.4.5 losing committed transactions
Date: 2004-09-25 03:25:04
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com> writes:
> I guess nobody ever relied that heavily on data to be persistent at the 
> microsecond the NOTIFY arrives ...

Sure they have.

In theory you cannot see a NOTIFY before the sending transaction
commits, because the sender is holding a lock on pg_notify and you can't
even find out that you've been notified until he releases it.

Your idea that the COMMIT WAL record is getting dropped would fit the
facts, but I really am having a hard time believing it.  Why would the
COMMIT record be more prone to loss than any other record?  All the
cases I have seen so far have the right number of non-COMMIT records in
the log, so the bogus transaction is not getting lost altogether.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Mahmoud TaghizadehDate: 2004-09-25 10:04:25
Subject: Re: How to add locale support for each column?
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2004-09-25 02:53:15
Subject: Re: 7.4.5 losing committed transactions

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group