| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, konstantin knizhnik <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
| Subject: | Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers |
| Date: | 2015-11-07 14:16:35 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1Ln00w-+c4U0vRNHwOGjUR=ks6_3MQGN_-rHN-On4ughA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 12:52 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 12:07 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
> >
> > On the whole, I'm inclined to think that the XTM-based approach is
> > probably more useful and more general, if we can work out the problems
> > with it. I'm not sure that I'm right, though, nor am I sure how hard
> > it will be.
> >
>
> If I understood correctly, then the main difference between 2PC idea
> used in this patch (considering we find some way of sharing snapshots
> in this approach) and what is shared in slides is that XTM-based
> approach
>
Read it as DTM-based approach.
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Emre Hasegeli | 2015-11-07 14:20:28 | Re: [PROPOSAL] Improvements of Hunspell dictionaries support |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2015-11-07 14:11:00 | Re: eXtensible Transaction Manager API |