Re: 2-phase commit
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: 2-phase commit |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200309291643.h8TGhkt29074@candle.pha.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | 2-phase commit (Andrew Sullivan <andrew@libertyrms.info>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: > > Marc G. Fournier wrote: > >>> Or the slave could reject the request. > >> > >> Huh? The slave has that option?? In what circumstance? > > > I thought the slave could reject if someone local already had the row > > locked. > > All normal reasons for transaction failure are supposed to be checked > for before the slave responds that it's ready to commit. Otherwise it's > supposed to say it can't commit. > > Basically the weak spot of 2PC is that it assumes there are no possible > reasons for failure after "ready to commit" is sent. You can make that > approximately true, with sufficient investment of resources, but it's > definitely not a pleasant assumption. Yep. There is no full solution. I think it is like running with fsync off --- if the OS crashes, you have to clean up --- if you fail on a 2-phase commit, you have to clean up. Multi-master will be the same. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania19073
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: