Re: logical decoding of two-phase transactions

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Stas Kelvich <s(dot)kelvich(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: logical decoding of two-phase transactions
Date: 2017-01-31 06:30:15
Message-ID: CAB7nPqSrk255+zBRL9E97YSMJgBjW_LM60jckPKrnbJot9PELw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 3:29 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 8:52 AM, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> Now, if it's simpler to just xlog the gid at COMMIT PREPARED time when
>> wal_level >= logical I don't think that's the end of the world. But
>> since we already have almost everything we need in memory, why not
>> just stash the gid on ReorderBufferTXN?
>
> I have been through this thread... And to be honest, I have a hard
> time understanding for which purpose the information of a 2PC
> transaction is useful in the case of logical decoding. The prepare and
> commit prepared have been received by a node which is at the root of
> the cluster tree, a node of the cluster at an upper level, or a
> client, being in charge of issuing all the prepare queries, and then
> issue the commit prepared to finish the transaction across a cluster.
> In short, even if you do logical decoding from the root node, or the
> one at a higher level, you would care just about the fact that it has
> been committed.

By the way, I have moved this patch to next CF, you guys seem to make
the discussion move on.
--
Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2017-01-31 06:33:05 Re: patch: function xmltable
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2017-01-31 06:29:45 Re: logical decoding of two-phase transactions