Re: make async slave to wait for lsn to be replayed
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: Ivan Kartyshov <i.kartyshov@postgrespro.ru>,
Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>, David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>, Thom Brown <thom@linux.com>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2017-03-21T17:17:47Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 10:20 PM, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > Maybe someone can think of a clever way for an extension to insert a > wait for a user-supplied LSN *before* acquiring a snapshot so it can > work for the higher levels, or maybe the hooks should go into core > PostgreSQL so that the extension can exist as an external project not > requiring a patched PostgreSQL installation, or maybe this should be > done with new core syntax that extends transaction commands. Do other > people have views on this? IMHO, trying to do this using a function-based interface is a really bad idea for exactly the reasons you mention. I don't see why we'd resist the idea of core syntax here; transactions are a core part of PostgreSQL. There is, of course, the question of whether making LSNs such a user-visible thing is a good idea in the first place, but that's a separate question from issue of what syntax for such a thing is best. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
Commits
-
Implement waiting for given lsn at transaction start
- 0f5ca02f53ac 13.0 landed