| From: | Ajin Cherian <itsajin(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Давыдов Виталий <v(dot)davydov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Slow catchup of 2PC (twophase) transactions on replica in LR |
| Date: | 2024-04-22 07:34:58 |
| Message-ID: | CAFPTHDZNwMWfJZprw9jsoa4-19-h337KRY9Pt41PdNiQTTYaiQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 4:26 PM Ajin Cherian <itsajin(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Attaching the patch for your review and comments. Big thanks to Kuroda-san
> for also working on the patch.
>
>
Looking at this a bit more, maybe rolling back all prepared transactions on
the subscriber when toggling two_phase from true to false might not be
desirable for the customer. Maybe we should have an option for customers to
control whether transactions should be rolled back or not. Maybe
transactions should only be rolled back if a "force" option is also set.
What do people think?
regards,
Ajin Cherian
Fujitsu Australia
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2024-04-22 07:47:51 | Re: Direct SSL connection with ALPN and HBA rules |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2024-04-22 07:19:53 | Re: Direct SSL connection with ALPN and HBA rules |