From: | "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz" <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, 'Kyotaro HORIGUCHI' <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, "sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com" <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | RE: Changing the setting of wal_sender_timeout per standby |
Date: | 2018-09-18 08:27:16 |
Message-ID: | 0A3221C70F24FB45833433255569204D1FAB12A8@G01JPEXMBYT05 |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
From: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI [mailto:horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp]
> At Fri, 14 Sep 2018 18:22:33 +0900, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote in
> <CAD21AoBr2Y=N4iH8+6m5ara2GWdKE6ZrzWaqjZux6ErZ9pyAxQ(at)mail(dot)gmail(dot)com>
> > On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 12:32 PM, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 01:14:12AM +0000, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote:
> > >> Some customer wants to change the setting per standby, i.e., a shorter
> > >> timeout for a standby in the same region to enable faster detection
> > >> failure and failover, and a longer timeout for a standby in the remote
> > >> region (for disaster recovery) to avoid mis-judging its health.
> > >
> > > This argument is sensible.
> > >
> > >> The current PGC_HUP allows to change the setting by editing
> > >> postgresql.conf or ALTER SYSTEM and then sending SIGHUP to a specific
> > >> walsender. But that's not easy to use. The user has to do it upon
> > >> every switchover and failover.
> > >>
> > >> With PGC_BACKEND, the user would be able to tune the timeout as follows:
> > >>
> > >> [recovery.conf]
> > >> primary_conninfo = '... options=''-c wal_sender_timeout=60000'' ...'
> > >>
> > >> With PGC_USERSET, the user would be able to use different user
> > >> accounts for each standby, and tune the setting as follows:
> > >>
> > >> ALTER USER repluser_remote SET wal_sender_timeout = 60000;
> > >
> > > It seems to me that switching to PGC_BACKENDwould cover already all
> the
> > > use-cases you are mentioning, as at the end one would just want to
> > > adjust the WAL sender timeout on a connection basis depending on the
> > > geographical location of the receiver and the latency between primary
> > > and standby.
> >
> > +1 for PGC_BACKEND. It looks enough for most use cases.
>
> +1, and we need a means to see the actual value, in
> pg_stat_replication?
Thanks, the patch attached. I'll add this to the next CF shortly. As Michael said, I think viewing the configured value would be a separate feature.
Regards
Takayuki Tsunakawa
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
walsender_timeout_PGC_BACKEND.patch | application/octet-stream | 1.8 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Gierth | 2018-09-18 08:32:14 | Re: Difference in TO_TIMESTAMP results. |
Previous Message | Antonin Houska | 2018-09-18 08:02:49 | Re: [HACKERS] Removing LEFT JOINs in more cases |