Re: Sync Rep v17

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Daniel Farina <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Sync Rep v17
Date: 2011-03-03 06:13:28
Message-ID: 1299132808.1974.6635.camel@ebony
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, 2011-03-03 at 13:35 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 12:11 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
> <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> > To achieve the effect Fujii is looking for, we would have to silently drop
> > the connection. That would correctly leave the client not knowing whether
> > the transaction committed or not.
>
> Yeah, this seems to make more sense.

How do you propose we do that?

--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/books/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-03-03 07:00:45 Re: Quick Extensions Question
Previous Message Fujii Masao 2011-03-03 04:35:47 Re: Sync Rep v17