Re: Proposal for CSN based snapshots

From: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Rajeev rastogi <rajeev(dot)rastogi(at)huawei(dot)com>, Ants Aasma <ants(at)cybertec(dot)at>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch>
Subject: Re: Proposal for CSN based snapshots
Date: 2014-05-12 16:14:55
Message-ID: 5370F37F.4060104@vmware.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 05/12/2014 06:26 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> >With the new "commit-in-progress" status in clog, we won't need the
>> >sub-committed clog status anymore. The "commit-in-progress" status will
>> >achieve the same thing.
> Wouldn't that cause many spurious waits? Because commit-in-progress
> needs to be waited on, but a sub-committed xact surely not?

Ah, no. Even today, a subxid isn't marked as sub-committed, until you
commit the top-level transaction. The sub-commit state is a very
transient state during the commit process, used to make the commit of
the sub-transactions and the top-level transaction appear atomic. The
commit-in-progress state would be a similarly short-lived state. You
mark the subxids and the top xid as commit-in-progress just before the
XLogInsert() of the commit record, and you replace them with the real
LSNs right after XLogInsert().

- Heikki

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fujii Masao 2014-05-12 16:23:04 Re: Archive recovery won't be completed on some situation.
Previous Message Greg Stark 2014-05-12 16:10:33 Re: Proposal for CSN based snapshots