On 02/01/2017 10:32 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
>> Also, including the GID in the WAL for each COMMIT/ABORT PREPARED
>> doesn't seem inordinately expensive to me.
> I'm confused ... isn't it there already?  If not, how do we handle
> reconstructing 2PC state from WAL at all?
>
>                       regards, tom lane
>
>
Right now logical decoding ignores prepare and take in account only "commit 
prepared":

            /*
             * Currently decoding ignores PREPARE TRANSACTION and will just
             * decode the transaction when the COMMIT PREPARED is sent or
             * throw away the transaction's contents when a ROLLBACK PREPARED
             * is received. In the future we could add code to expose prepared
             * transactions in the changestream allowing for a kind of
             * distributed 2PC.
             */

For some scenarios it works well, but if we really need prepared state at 
replica (as in case of multimaster), then it is not enough.

-- 
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company



-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Reply via email to