| From: | Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: 2PC-induced lockup |
| Date: | 2007-07-12 18:35:49 |
| Message-ID: | 20070712183549.GK4606@phlogiston.dyndns.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 10:47:25PM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> expertise to isolate this as the error. I would prefer to explicitly
> avoid this kind of error, so that we can return to the idea that
> removing pg_twophase is never a requirement.
This was pretty much my point. It's one thing to say, "If you are
completely hosed, you will lose some data." But 2PC is making some
pretty strong promises, and I sort of hate it that it's not real hard
to break things in such a way that those promises have to be broken.
A
--
Andrew Sullivan | ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca
When my information changes, I alter my conclusions. What do you do sir?
--attr. John Maynard Keynes
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Sullivan | 2007-07-12 18:44:24 | Re: 2PC-induced lockup |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-07-12 18:17:29 | Re: Assertion failure with inherited column mappings and dropped columns |