Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers

The previous patch would not compile on the latest HEAD. Here's updated
patch.

On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 1:55 PM, Ashutosh Bapat <
ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 6:20 AM, Amit Langote <
> Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
>
>> On 2015-08-05 AM 06:11, Robert Haas wrote:
>> > On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 8:19 PM, Amit Langote
>> > <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
>> >> On 2015-08-03 PM 09:24, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
>> >>> For postgres_fdw it's a boolean server-level option
>> 'twophase_compliant'
>> >>> (suggestions for name welcome).
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> How about just 'twophase'?
>> >
>> > How about two_phase_commit?
>> >
>>
>> Much cleaner, +1
>>
>>
> I was more inclined to use an adjective, since it's a property of server,
> instead of a noun. But two_phase_commit looks fine as well, included in the
> patch attached.
>
> Attached patch addresses all the concerns and suggestions from previous
> mails in this mail thread.
>
> --
> Best Wishes,
> Ashutosh Bapat
> EnterpriseDB Corporation
> The Postgres Database Company
>

--
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Company