Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Etsuro Fujita
Subject Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2
Date
Msg-id CAPmGK177E6HPcCQB4-s+m9AcCZDHCC2drZy+FKnnvEXw9kXoXQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2  (Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Fujii-san,

On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 11:37 PM Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com> wrote:
> On 2021/10/07 19:47, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 1:29 PM k.jamison@fujitsu.com
> > <k.jamison@fujitsu.com> wrote:
> >> and prove that commit performance can be improved,
> >> e.g. if we can commit not in serial but also possible in parallel.
> >
> > If it's ok with you, I'd like to work on the performance issue.  What
> > I have in mind is commit all remote transactions in parallel instead
> > of sequentially in the postgres_fdw transaction callback, as mentioned
> > above, but I think that would improve the performance even for
> > one-phase commit that we already have.
>
> +100

I’ve started working on this.  Once I have a (POC) patch, I’ll post it
in a new thread, as I think it can be discussed separately.

Thanks!

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: ldap/t/001_auth.pl fails with openldap 2.5
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: More business with $Test::Builder::Level in the TAP tests