On Saturday 03 February 2007, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Jan Wieck wrote: > > I don't have any such paper and the proof of concept will be the > > implementation of the system. I do however see enough resistance against > > this proposal to withdraw the commit timestamp at this time. The new > > replication system will therefore require the installation of a patched, > > non-standard PostgreSQL version, compiled from sources cluster wide in > > order to be used. I am aware that this will dramatically reduce it's > > popularity but it is impossible to develop this essential feature as an > > external module. > > > > I thank everyone for their attention. > > Going and working on it on your own doesn't seem like the proper > solution. I don't see people objecting to adding it, but they want it > work, which I am sure you want too. You have to show how it will work > and convince others of that, and then you have a higher chance it will > work, and be in the PostgreSQL codebase.
Hi, Would it be possible to solve the problem using the GORDA on-commit hook? Jan would be able reliably obtain a commit timestamp with the desired semantics and store it in a regular table within transaction boundaries. PostgreSQL would not have to commit to a specific timestamp semantics and the patch is quite small. Regards, -- Jose Orlando Pereira ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org