Re: [HACKERS] redolog - for discussion

Jan Wieck wrote:
> 
> >
> > I foresee problems with using _commands_ logging for
> > recovery/replication -:((
> >
...
> 
>     Yepp,  the order in which commands begun is absolutely not of
>     interest. Locking could already delay the  execution  of  one
>     command  until  another  one  started  later has finished and
>     released the lock.  It's a classic race condition.
> 
>     Thus, my plan was to log the queries just before the call  to
>     CommitTransactionCommand()  in  tcop. This has the advantage,

Oh, I see - you right!

...
> 
>     Unfortunately  query  level  logging get's hit by the current
>     implementation of sequence numbers. If  a  query  that  get's
...
> 
>     All that is painful and I don't see another solution yet than
>     to  hook  into  nextval(),  log  out the numbers generated in

Not so bad, having buffering these numbers in memory...

>     normal operation and getting back the same  numbers  in  redo
>     mode.
> 
>     The whole thing gets more and more complicated :-(

As usual -:))

Vadim