On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 2:46 PM, Amit Langote <langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote: > > Hi, > > On 2016/02/29 18:05, Thomas Munro wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 9:05 PM, Amit Langote wrote: >>> + servers. A transaction that is run with >>> <varname>causal_reads</> set >>> + to <literal>on</> is guaranteed either to see the effects of all >>> + completed transactions run on the primary with the setting on, or >>> to >>> + receive an error "standby is not available for causal reads". >>> >>> "A transaction that is run" means "A transaction that is run on a >>> standby", right? >> >> Well, it could be any server, standby or primary. Of course standbys >> are the interesting case since it it was already true that if you run >> two sequential transactions run on the primary, the second can see the >> effect of the first, but I like the idea of a general rule that >> applies anywhere, allowing you not to care which server it is. > > I meant actually in context of that sentence only.
Ok, here's a new version that includes that change, fixes a conflict with recent commit 10b48522 and removes an accidental duplicate copy of the README file. -- Thomas Munro http://www.enterprisedb.com
Description: Binary data
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers