Re: A 2 phase commit weirdness
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: A 2 phase commit weirdness |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 14918.1117206726@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: A 2 phase commit weirdness (Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>) |
Ответы |
Re: A 2 phase commit weirdness
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> writes: > Looking at the sequence, at least the relcache init file stuff looks if > not broken at least a bit heavy-handed... I was planning to change that ;-) ... using separate 2PC action records for the relcache init file actions would make it much better. > Now consider this scenario: > backend A: Do updates that cause an init file invalidation > backend A: Commit begins > backend A: unlink init file > backend B starts and recreates init file > backend A: send inval message > backend C starts and reads the now stale init file No problem, because C will receive A's inval messages after that. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: