On 02/01/2017 10:32 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas <[email protected]> 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?
>
> regards, tom lane
>
>
Right now logical decoding ignores prepare and take in account only "commit
prepared":
/*
* Currently decoding ignores PREPARE TRANSACTION and will just
* decode the transaction when the COMMIT PREPARED is sent or
* throw away the transaction's contents when a ROLLBACK PREPARED
* is received. In the future we could add code to expose prepared
* transactions in the changestream allowing for a kind of
* distributed 2PC.
*/
For some scenarios it works well, but if we really need prepared state at
replica (as in case of multimaster), then it is not enough.
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
