| From: | Ajin Cherian <itsajin(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Skip collecting decoded changes of already-aborted transactions |
| Date: | 2024-03-27 11:49:14 |
| Message-ID: | CAFPTHDZ=EA7VpjrWa0wMcXhubuOM82-g1b-0d5JZF2FjzLtDrQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 7:50 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
>
> In addition to these changes, I've made some changes to the latest
> patch. Here is the summary:
>
> - Use txn_flags field to record the transaction status instead of two
> 'committed' and 'aborted' flags.
> - Add regression tests.
> - Update commit message.
>
> Regards,
>
>
Hi Sawada-san,
Thanks for the updated patch. Some comments:
1.
+ * already aborted, we discards all changes accumulated so far and ignore
+ * future changes, and return true. Otherwise return false.
we discards/we discard
2. In function ReorderBufferCheckTXNAbort(): I haven't tested this but I
wonder how prepared transactions would be considered, they are neither
committed, nor in progress.
regards,
Ajin Cherian
Fujitsu Australia
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2024-03-27 12:22:43 | Re: Skip collecting decoded changes of already-aborted transactions |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2024-03-27 11:39:29 | Re: Flushing large data immediately in pqcomm |