Re: Async Commit, v21 (now: v22) - Mailing list pgsql-patches

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Async Commit, v21 (now: v22)
Date
Msg-id 15643.1185308707@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Async Commit, v21 (now: v22)  ("Jim C. Nasby" <decibel@decibel.org>)
Responses Re: Async Commit, v21 (now: v22)  ("Simon Riggs" <simon@2ndquadrant.com>)
Re: Async Commit, v21 (now: v22)  (Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>)
List pgsql-patches
"Jim C. Nasby" <decibel@decibel.org> writes:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2007 at 02:08:00PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> Is it true that a transaction is turned into sync commit as soon as it
>> writes on a system catalog?  Is it desirable to make it so?

> If we don't do that then regular users have the ability to put the
> catalog (and by extension everything else) at risk...

How do you arrive at that conclusion?  The point of the async commit
patch is that transactions might be lost, as in not really committed,
but there can be no database corruption.  Otherwise we'd never consider
making it a userset config setting.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-patches by date:

Previous
From: "Jim C. Nasby"
Date:
Subject: Re: Async Commit, v21 (now: v22)
Next
From: "Simon Riggs"
Date:
Subject: Re: Async Commit, v21 (now: v22)