Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Rework subtransaction commit protocol for hot standby.
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Rework subtransaction commit protocol for hot standby. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 28006.1224716009@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Rework subtransaction commit protocol for hot standby. (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Rework subtransaction commit
protocol for hot standby.
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes: > My interest was really in maintaining ultra-correctness, while removing > the need to WAL log subcommits for Hot Standby. I think I achieved that, > almost, but if you see further optimizations that is good too. I'm not focusing on performance here --- I'm focusing on whether I trust the patch at all. I dislike blowing a hole that size in the sanity checks in TransactionIdSetStatus. I note that the hole still isn't big enough, since presumably you'd have to allow ABORTED=>SUB_COMMITTED too. That means that out of the four state transitions that are disallowed by the original coding of that Assert, you are now having to consider two as legal. I don't like that, and I like even less that it's not even trying to determine whether this is a replay-driven change. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: