On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 1:34 PM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 1:41 PM, Ashutosh Bapat
> <ashutosh.ba...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>>>> No, the COMMIT returns after the first phase. It can not wait for all
>>>> the foreign servers to complete their second phase
>>> Hm, it sounds like it's same as normal commit (not 2PC).
>>> What's the difference?
>>> My understanding is that basically the local server can not return
>>> COMMIT to the client until 2nd phase is completed.
>> If we do that, the local server may not return to the client at all,
>> if the foreign server crashes and never comes up. Practically, it may
>> take much longer to finish a COMMIT, depending upon how long it takes
>> for the foreign server to reply to a COMMIT message.
> Yes, I think 2PC behaves so, please refer to [1].
> To prevent local server stops forever due to communication failure.,
> we could provide the timeout on coordinator side or on participant
> side.

This too, looks like a heuristic and shouldn't be the default
behaviour and hence not part of the first version of this feature.

Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Company

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to