Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2
От | Amit Kapila |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAA4eK1K_edn6ib2__zLoP=BTAkaQb3uxMF271=5NQ=+N8x48uA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | RE: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2 ("tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com" <tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 3:03 PM tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com <tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com> wrote: > > From: Masahiko Sawada <masahiko.sawada@2ndquadrant.com> > > So what's your opinion? > > * Global visibility > This is what Amit-san suggested some times -- "design it before reviewing the current patch." I'm a bit optimistic aboutthis and think this FDW 2PC can be implemented separately as a pure enhancement of FDW. But I also understand his concern. If your (our?) aim is to use this FDW 2PC for sharding, > As far as I understand that is what the goal is for which this is a step. For example, see the wiki [1]. I understand that wiki is not the final thing but I have seen other places as well where there is a mention of FDW based sharding and I feel this is the reason why many people are trying to improve this area. That is why I suggested having an upfront design of global visibility and a deadlock detector along with this work. [1] - https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/WIP_PostgreSQL_Sharding -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: