| From: | Ajin Cherian <itsajin(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions |
| Date: | 2020-09-18 12:49:46 |
| Message-ID: | CAFPTHDanJ0g+HWm1Hm_X13o-B=Q-QNAUwg2cuibsnuH5b4FR3g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 10:35 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Yeah, I think that would be better. How about if name the new variable
> as cleanup_prepared?
I haven't added a new flag to indicate that the prepare was cleaned
up, as that wasn' really necessary. Instead I used a new function to
do partial cleanup to do whatever was not done in the truncate. If you
think, using a flag and doing special handling in
ReorderBufferCleanupTXN was a better idea, let me know.
regards,
Ajin Cherian
Fujitsu Australia
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andy Fan | 2020-09-18 13:28:10 | Re: Dynamic gathering the values for seq_page_cost/xxx_cost |
| Previous Message | Andrey M. Borodin | 2020-09-18 12:33:26 | Re: Concurrency issue in pg_rewind |