Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Masahiko Sawada
Subject Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers
Date
Msg-id CAD21AoAW91sgi1nzfVEJ=0czfxyirj4no1Yj-hvi8MbZxXJBfg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers  (Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 3:19 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 2:00 AM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I think we can consider the atomic commit and the atomic visibility
>> separately, and the atomic visibility can build on the top of the
>> atomic commit.
>
> It is true that we can do that, but I'm not sure whether it's the best design.

I'm not sure best design, too. We need to discuss more. But this is
not a particular feature for the sharing solution. The atomic commit
using 2PC is useful for other servers that can use 2PC, not only
postgres_fdw.

Attached latest 3 patches that incorporated review comments so far.
But recovery speed improvement that is discussed on another thread is
not incorporated yet.
Please give me feedback.

Regards,

--
Masahiko Sawada
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Steve Singer
Date:
Subject: Re: Logical Replication WIP
Next
From: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
Date:
Subject: Re: Radix tree for character conversion