[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: ITS#2512 wrong order of entries in replog file
At 02:22 AM 12/24/2003, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
>There is a partial fix for this now in CVS HEAD. The replog entries are now
>timestamped according to when the operation began, instead of when the
>operation was logged. The entries are still written in an unpredictable
>order, but it is now feasible for the replog to be sorted into correct order.
You assume the order in which they are stamped is the "correct"
(commit) order. This is not true. It is still possible that
an add stamped after another needs to be processed before that
That is, now we have a race to commit instead of a race to log.
This, however, may be a better race to have.
>slurpd has been modified to attempt to sort its queue when it reads the
>replog. With this patch, if operations execute at close to the same time and
>are logged at close to the same time, slurpd will replicate them correctly.
>However, when the log is out of order, there is no check for missing
>operations in a sequence. An operation that is significantly delayed (due to
>database contention) may still be replicated out of order if it is not logged
>by the time slurpd reads the replog. I.e., if all changes have been written
>to the replog, then slurpd will send them all in correct order. If any
>changes are outstanding/missing when slurpd reads the log, then the order is
> -- Howard Chu
> Chief Architect, Symas Corp. Director, Highland Sun
> http://www.symas.com http://highlandsun.com/hyc
> Symas: Premier OpenSource Development and Support