Re: Proposal: Commit timestamp - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Gregory Stark
Subject Re: Proposal: Commit timestamp
Date
Msg-id 87y7nd287b.fsf@stark.xeocode.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Proposal: Commit timestamp  (Theo Schlossnagle <jesus@omniti.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
"Theo Schlossnagle" <jesus@omniti.com> writes:

> As the clock must be incremented clusterwide, the need for it to be insync with
> the system clock (on any or all of the systems) is  obviated.  In fact, as you
> can't guarantee the synchronicity means  that it can be confusing -- one
> expects a time-based clock to be  accurate to the time.  A counter-based clock
> has no such expectations.

So if the nodes get split they can keep operating independently but clients
can see that there's no guarantee of ordering against transactions from other
nodes because the clock isn't advancing?

--  Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB          http://www.enterprisedb.com


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Theo Schlossnagle
Date:
Subject: Re: Proposal: Commit timestamp
Next
From: Martijn van Oosterhout
Date:
Subject: Re: VC2005 build and pthreads