On 7/23/21, 3:58 AM, "Amit Kapila" <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 2:48 AM Bossart, Nathan <bossa...@amazon.com> wrote: >> Instead of blocking query cancellations and backend terminations, I >> think we should allow them to proceed, but we should keep the >> transactions marked in-progress so they do not yet become visible to >> sessions on the primary. >> > > One naive question, what if the primary gets some error while changing > the status from in-progress to committed? Won't in such a case the > transaction will be visible on standby but not on the primary?
Yes. In this case, the transaction would remain in-progress on the primary until it can be marked committed. >> Once replication has caught up to the >> the necessary point, the transactions can be marked completed, and >> they would finally become visible. >> > > If the session issued the commit is terminated, will this work be done > by some background process? I think the way I'm imagining it is that a background process would be responsible for handling all of the "offloaded" transactions. I'm not wedded to any particular design at this point, though. Nathan
