Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> We can't augment the commit/abort messages because
>> we must cater for non-transactional invalidations also, plus commit
>> xlrecs are already complex enough. So we log invalidations prior to
>> commit, queue them and then trigger the send at commit (if it
>> happens).
> Augmenting the commit messages seems like the better approach. It allows
> invalidation messages to be fired as they are read off the xlrec. Still
> need the additional message type to handle nontransactional
> invalidation. There are other messages possibly more complex than this
> already.
I guess I hadn't been paying attention, but: adding syscache inval
traffic to WAL seems like a completely horrid idea, both from the
complexity and performance standpoints. What about using the existing
syscache logic to re-derive inval information from watching the update
operations?
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
