On 11-11-23 04:09 PM, Steve Singer wrote: Maxim,
Did you ever check to see if this patch actually fixes your problem with running Slony against 9.1.x? Did you encounter any other issues with it? > On 11-11-23 09:27 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 1:51 PM, Steve Singer<[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> On 11-11-23 04:28 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: >>>> >>>> On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 10:26 PM, Steve Singer<[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 11-11-20 05:47 AM, Cédric Villemain wrote: >>>>>> >>> >>>> >>>> ISTM that setting the remote worker to REPEATABLE READ would work well >>>> for this case. Patch attached. >>>> >>> >>> Simon, Did you forget to attach the patch? I don't see it. >> >> Looks that way. >> > > Thanks for the patch. > > So why would a SERIALIZABLE READ ONLY DEFERRED transaction produce fewer > conflicts than a READ COMMITTED transaction? Currently the > remote_listener gets the default isolation level (READ COMMITTED). > > The attached patch combines your two patches plus performs the same > change to other places in remote_worker (there are places in > remote_worker.c where that initial transaction is rolledback and > restarted, this version also makes sure that those transactions are > started as READ COMMITTED). It also makes the connections that the > remote helpers do to the remote database for querying sl_log_x READ ONLY > DEFERRED. > > When I run this patch through the test suite on 9.1 I don't see any > serialization pivot failures (at least not yet). > _______________________________________________ Slony1-general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slony.info/mailman/listinfo/slony1-general
