Re: [HACKERS] Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoaQ6kTTzq4uNZV6MULNBa5ciP-LbxWb4P+_v4ChbwYn3w@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | RE: [HACKERS] Transactions involving multiple postgres foreignservers ("Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa.takay@jp.fujitsu.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 9:40 PM, Tsunakawa, Takayuki <tsunakawa.takay@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote: > (1) > Why don't you use the existing global variable MyXactFlags instead of the new TransactionDidWrite? Or, how about usingXactLastRecEnd != 0 to determine the transaction did any writes? When the transaction only modified temporary tableson the local database and some data on one remote database, I think 2pc is unnecessary. If I understand correctly, XactLastRecEnd can be set by, for example, a HOT cleanup record, so that doesn't seem like a good thing to use. Whether we need to use 2PC across remote nodes seems like it shouldn't depend on whether a local SELECT statement happened to do a HOT cleanup or not. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: