On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 7:00 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote: > > On 2024-Jun-07, Tomas Vondra wrote: > > > On 6/3/24 09:30, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > On Sat, May 25, 2024 at 2:39 AM Tomas Vondra > > > <tomas.von...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > > > >> How is this going to deal with the fact that commit LSN and timestamps > > >> may not correlate perfectly? That is, commits may happen with LSN1 < > > >> LSN2 but with T1 > T2. > > > But as I wrote, I'm not quite convinced this means there are not other > > issues with this way of resolving conflicts. It's more likely a more > > complex scenario is required. > > Jan Wieck approached me during pgconf.dev to reproach me of this > problem. He also said he had some code to fix-up the commit TS > afterwards somehow, to make the sequence monotonically increasing. > Perhaps we should consider that, to avoid any problems caused by the > difference between LSN order and TS order. It might be quite > nightmarish to try to make the system work correctly without > reasonable constraints of that nature. >
I agree with this but the problem Jan was worried about was not directly reproducible in what the PostgreSQL provides at least that is what I understood then. We are also unable to think of a concrete scenario where this is a problem but we are planning to spend more time deriving a test to reproducible the problem. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
