| From: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers |
| Date: | 2018-01-01 10:12:16 |
| Message-ID: | CAFjFpRfWcKRoyw4PQQkQZbVqJE_0amx=1wfdxxk4dOCDgK8pMA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 11:08 AM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> (1)
>> Why don't you use the existing global variable MyXactFlags instead of the new TransactionDidWrite? Or, how about using XactLastRecEnd != 0 to determine the transaction did any writes? When the transaction only modified temporary tables on the local database and some data on one remote database, I think 2pc is unnecessary.
>
> Perhaps we can use (XactLastRecEnd != 0 && markXidCommitted) to see if
> we did any writes on local node which requires the atomic commit. Will
> fix.
>
I haven't checked how much code it needs to track whether the local
transaction wrote anything. But probably we can post-pone this
optimization. If it's easy to incorporate, it's good to have in the
first set itself.
--
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-01-01 10:55:37 | Re: Increasing timeout of poll_query_until for TAP tests |
| Previous Message | Beena Emerson | 2018-01-01 06:22:39 | Re: [HACKERS] Runtime Partition Pruning |