Re: testing hot standby - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jaime Casanova
Subject Re: testing hot standby
Date
Msg-id x2v3073cc9b1004130908od41f2f91u3e0c4af3b4c24b69@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: testing hot standby  (Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 11:06 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
<heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> Jaime Casanova wrote:
>>
>> i will read it on the morning and the thread where it is, something
>> that seems strange to me is that the patch touch twophase.c and
>> twophase.h, why?
>
> When you start hot standby from an online checkpoint, the XIDs of any
> two-phase transactions are included in the running-xacts record, just
> like any other in-progress transactions. At a shutdown checkpoint, we
> know that no regular transactions are in-progress, but there can be
> transactions in prepared state, which need to be considered as
> in-progress in the standby, but there's no information about them in the
> shutdown record. So we scan pg_twophase to discover them.
>
>

ah! that makes sense... thanks

--
Atentamente,
Jaime Casanova
Soporte y capacitación de PostgreSQL
Asesoría y desarrollo de sistemas
Guayaquil - Ecuador
Cel. +59387171157


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: testing hot standby
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: Naming of new EXCLUDE constraints