PostgreSql - access modified rows in prepare transaction command

On 20.02.2013 12:48, pierpaolo.cincilla wrote:

I have the problem to access modified data (updates and inserts) in a
prepare transaction statement before a commit/rollback. For example consider
the following block:

BEGIN;
do some update;
do some insert;
PREPARE TRANSACTION 'transaction1';

After executing the 'prepare' command (and before executing the 'commit'
command), I neeed to fetch the data modified by the transaction
'transaction1'. I can fetch the rows with the old values that are modified
by the transaction (using the xmax field), howewer I need also the values
that the transaction will write into these rows when it commits.

Postgres needs to store these values somewhere in order to commit the
transaction when it is required, so my question is: how can I access these
values? Thank you in advance.

In short, you can't. PostgreSQL stores the values in the tables, but
they are invisible to other transactions until the prepared transaction
is committed. From this point of view, a prepared transaction behaves
the same as a transaction that's still in-progress in another backend.

If you explain a bit more what you're trying to accomplish, someone can
probably suggest a better solution.

- Heikki

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

Thank you Heikki for your reply. As you suggest, I will explain better what
I'm trying to accomplish.

What I'm writing a ditributed two-phase-commit termination protocol that
work in this manner:

1) Each site has a replica of the database. A site A perform a transaction
t1 and prepare it (PREPARE TRANSACTION 't1'). Then it atomic broadcast a
certification request for the transaction t1 *along with its writeset*
(values updated by t1) to other sites.

2) When a site receive the certification request for transaction t1 does the
certification (check that there are no concurrent conflicting transactions).
If the certification succeed then
2a) if the transaction is local (i.e. originated at that site) it commit the
transaction (COMMMIT PREPARED 't1').
2b) If the transaction is remote (i.e. prepared at another site) *it apply
locally the writeset of transaction t1* to reflect modifications to its
local replica of the database (UPDATE command).

The problem is that if I can't fetch the writeset of a transaction in phase
1 (before the commit request) then when I certify the transaction at another
site I can't apply the updates performed by the remote transaction right
away but I have to wait the originating site to commit the transaction and
send back its writeset (now visible). This will be very bad because it adds
an extra round to the algorithm.

--
View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/PostgreSql-access-modified-rows-in-prepare-transaction-command-tp5745926p5745930.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - hackers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

On Wednesday, February 20, 2013 5:10 PM pierpaolo.cincilla wrote:

Thank you Heikki for your reply. As you suggest, I will explain better
what
I'm trying to accomplish.

What I'm writing a ditributed two-phase-commit termination protocol
that
work in this manner:

1) Each site has a replica of the database. A site A perform a
transaction
t1 and prepare it (PREPARE TRANSACTION 't1'). Then it atomic broadcast
a
certification request for the transaction t1 *along with its writeset*
(values updated by t1) to other sites.

2) When a site receive the certification request for transaction t1
does the
certification (check that there are no concurrent conflicting
transactions).
If the certification succeed then
2a) if the transaction is local (i.e. originated at that site) it
commit the
transaction (COMMMIT PREPARED 't1').
2b) If the transaction is remote (i.e. prepared at another site) *it
apply
locally the writeset of transaction t1* to reflect modifications to its
local replica of the database (UPDATE command).

The problem is that if I can't fetch the writeset of a transaction in
phase
1 (before the commit request) then when I certify the transaction at
another
site I can't apply the updates performed by the remote transaction
right
away but I have to wait the originating site to commit the transaction
and
send back its writeset (now visible). This will be very bad because it
adds
an extra round to the algorithm.

I think the one possible way to get the transaction data at the point you
need will be through
WAL, but that will also not be straightforward, you need to decode and find
in WAL corresponding data.

With Regards,
Amit Kapila.

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

On 20.02.2013 13:39, pierpaolo.cincilla wrote:

Thank you Heikki for your reply. As you suggest, I will explain better what
I'm trying to accomplish.

What I'm writing a ditributed two-phase-commit termination protocol that
work in this manner:

1) Each site has a replica of the database. A site A perform a transaction
t1 and prepare it (PREPARE TRANSACTION 't1'). Then it atomic broadcast a
certification request for the transaction t1 *along with its writeset*
(values updated by t1) to other sites.

2) When a site receive the certification request for transaction t1 does the
certification (check that there are no concurrent conflicting transactions).
If the certification succeed then
2a) if the transaction is local (i.e. originated at that site) it commit the
transaction (COMMMIT PREPARED 't1').
2b) If the transaction is remote (i.e. prepared at another site) *it apply
locally the writeset of transaction t1* to reflect modifications to its
local replica of the database (UPDATE command).

The usual way to keep two identical databases in sync using two-phase
commit is to just run all the statements in both databases. That assumes
that the statements always produce identical results in both databases,
though.

The problem is that if I can't fetch the writeset of a transaction in phase
1 (before the commit request) then when I certify the transaction at another
site I can't apply the updates performed by the remote transaction right
away but I have to wait the originating site to commit the transaction and
send back its writeset (now visible). This will be very bad because it adds
an extra round to the algorithm.

You could fetch the "writeset" in the same connection just before
calling PREPARE TRANSACTION. While the transaction is still active, the
changes are visible to itself.

Aside from any extra round-trips, the bigger reason you can't commit
first and then fetch the writeset is that you can't roll back the
transaction anymore, if the writeset can't be applied on the other node.
If you could live with that, and the problem is just the latency, then
you don't need two-phase commit to begin with.

- Heikki

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