On Wednesday, August 18, 2010 08:40:21 pm Adrian von Bidder wrote: > Heyho! > > On Thursday 19 August 2010 01.32:06 Benjamin Smith wrote: > > This way we can be sure that either all the databases are in synch, or > > that we need to rollback the program patch/update. > > I guess this might be more a hack than a solution: do the updates in > batches and use 2pc: first connect to batches of databases, but instead of > commit, you "prepare to commit". Prepared commits like this are > persistent accross connections, so you can come back later and commit or > rollback. > > Note that such prepared commits will block (some) stuff and use resources > (not sure how many) before they are finally committed or rolled back, so > you'll want to make sure they don't stick around too long. I can't see how this would be a hack, it's EXACTLY what I'm looking for! So often I find that when limits in Postgres get in my way, it's because I don't understand Postgres well enough. Much kudos to all of the Postgres team! -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
