Re: Synchronous replication & Hot standby patches

On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 17:36 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-02-25 at 00:51 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 3:47 PM, K, Niranjan (NSN - IN/Bangalore)
> > <niranjan(dot)k(at)nsn(dot)com> wrote:
> > > Could you please let me know what are the outstanding features that are still to be developed in the respective patches?
> > >
> > > I'am currently referring the wiki: "Todo and Claim" for NTT and for HotStandby, i see that almost all issues are closed. Are there any features / refactoring / bugs still need to be fixed.
> >
> > At least I'm planning to work on the following two items of Synch Rep for v8.5.
> > Of course, Synch Rep works fine without these features.
>
> > - Add new feature which transfers all WAL records via the direct connection
> > between the primary and the standby. In other words, get rid of
> > file-based log shipping part from the patch.
> > http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/496B9495.4010902@enterprisedb.com
>
> Please bear in mind my strong objection to this. Attempting to transfer
> all data via a single connection destroys VLDB usage of this feature. So
> for me its just additional code for ease-of-use in the simplest case,
> not code replacement.

Well VLDB is like 2% of what we need. If the above will remove all the
B.S. currently associated with actually doing PITR (rsync, scp, nfs,
pg_standby pick your poison) then I am all for it.

Log shipping should be:

I am master, my slave is here.
I am slave, I understand my master is here.
Here is our mutual authentication love token.
Let congress begin.

Anything more and we are being difficult for the sake of being
difficult.

Joshua D. Drake

--
PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdrake(at)jabber(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Consulting, Development, Support, Training
503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997