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

From Craig Ringer
Subject Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions
Date
Msg-id CAMsr+YEDR3OHhULKa_Xk+JKSvCajSSjgKqzF-EaPKNyUDEB9QQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers


On 2 Feb. 2017 08:32, "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> Also, including the GID in the WAL for each COMMIT/ABORT PREPARED
> doesn't seem inordinately expensive to me.

I'm confused ... isn't it there already?  If not, how do we handle
reconstructing 2PC state from WAL at all?

Right. Per my comments uothread I don't see why we need to add anything more to WAL here.

Stas was concerned about what happens in logical decoding if we crash between PREPSRE TRANSACTION and COMMIT PREPARED. But we'll always go back and decode the whole txn again anyway so it doesn't matter.

We can just track it on ReorderBufferTxn when we see it at PREPARE TRANSACTION time.

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM)
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make psql's \set display variablesin alphabetical order.