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 CAPmGK17uk7kOEoBudumx1-b+sn4=-4FioX+A_DAtf33P+TfLsQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to RE: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2  ("k.jamison@fujitsu.com" <k.jamison@fujitsu.com>)
Responses Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2  (Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 1:29 PM k.jamison@fujitsu.com
<k.jamison@fujitsu.com> wrote:
> That said, if we're going to initially support it on postgres_fdw, which is simpler
> than the latest patches, we need to ensure that abnormalities and errors
> are properly handled 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.  Maybe I'm missing something,
though.

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Rajkumar Raghuwanshi
Date:
Subject: Re: Multi-Column List Partitioning
Next
From: Amul Sul
Date:
Subject: Re: prevent immature WAL streaming