Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2
От | Etsuro Fujita |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAPmGK17uk7kOEoBudumx1-b+sn4=-4FioX+A_DAtf33P+TfLsQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | RE: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2 ("k.jamison@fujitsu.com" <k.jamison@fujitsu.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 1:29 PM k.jamison@fujitsu.com <k.jamison@fujitsu.com> wrote: > That said, if we're going to initially support it on postgres_fdw, which is simpler > than the latest patches, we need to ensure that abnormalities and errors > are properly handled and prove that commit performance can be improved, > e.g. if we can commit not in serial but also possible in parallel. If it's ok with you, I'd like to work on the performance issue. What I have in mind is commit all remote transactions in parallel instead of sequentially in the postgres_fdw transaction callback, as mentioned above, but I think that would improve the performance even for one-phase commit that we already have. Maybe I'm missing something, though. Best regards, Etsuro Fujita
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: