Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Smith
Subject Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions
Date
Msg-id CAHut+PuZxXThYL23yxujehKzNT020-+F2rL1zXN8ZodEN=eirg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions  (vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 1:31 PM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote:
>

> 4) Should we change this to "The end LSN of the prepared transaction"
> just to avoid any confusion of it meaning commit/rollback.
> +<varlistentry>
> +<term>Int64</term>
> +<listitem><para>
> +                The end LSN of the transaction.
> +</para></listitem>
> +</varlistentry>
>

Can you please provide more details so I can be sure of the context of
this feedback, e.g. there are multiple places that match that patch
fragment provided. So was this suggestion to change all of them ( 'b',
'P', 'K' , 'r'  of patch 0001; and also 'p' of patch 0002) ?

------
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Julien Rouhaud
Date:
Subject: Re: Reducing opr_sanity test's runtime under CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS
Next
From: "tanghy.fnst@fujitsu.com"
Date:
Subject: Remove "FROM" in "DELETE FROM" when using tab-completion