Re: logical changeset generation v3 - comparison to Postgres-R change set format
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: logical changeset generation v3 - comparison to Postgres-R change set format |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20121116141432.GB6505@awork2.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: logical changeset generation v3 - comparison to Postgres-R change set format (Markus Wanner <markus@bluegap.ch>) |
Ответы |
Re: logical changeset generation v3 - comparison to Postgres-R
change set format
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, On 2012-11-16 14:46:39 +0100, Markus Wanner wrote: > You may have noticed that there's an additional COID field. This is an > identifier for the transaction that last changed this tuple. Together > with the primary key, it effectively identifies the exact version of a > tuple (during its lifetime, for example before vs after an UPDATE). This > in turn is used by Postgres-R to detect conflicts. Whats the data type of the "COID" in -R? In the patchset the output plugin has enough data to get the old xid and the new xid in the case of updates (not in the case of deletes, but thats a small bug and should be fixable with a single line of code), and it has enough information to extract the primary key without problems. I wonder whether we also should track the xid epoch... > It may be possible to add that to the proposed format as well, for it to > be able to implement a Postgres-R-like algorithm. I don't know the exact Postgres-R algorithm (but I queued reading some papers you referred to when we talked), but I guess what we have in mind is roughly similar - its just not even remotely part of this patchset ;) Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: