From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Hot Standby remaining issues |
Date: | 2009-12-04 08:49:57 |
Message-ID: | 1259916597.13774.37592.camel@ebony |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 2009-12-04 at 10:37 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Regarding this item from the wiki page:
> > The "standby delay" is measured as current timestamp - timestamp of last replayed commit record. If there's little activity in the master, that can lead to surprising results. For example, imagine that max_standby_delay is set to 8 hours. The standby is fully up-to-date with the master, and there's no write activity in master. After 10 hours, a long reporting query is started in the standby. Ten minutes later, a small transaction is executed in the master that conflicts with the reporting query. I would expect the reporting query to be canceled 8 hours after the conflicting transaction began, but it is in fact canceled immediately, because it's over 8 hours since the last commit record was replayed.
> >
> > * Simon says... changed to allow checkpoints to update recoveryLastXTime (Simon DONE)
>
> Update recoveryLastXTime at checkpoints doesn't help when the master is
> completely idle, because we skip checkpoints in that case. It's better
> than nothing, of course.
Not if archive_timeout is set, which it would be in warm standby case.
We can do even better than this with SR.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2009-12-04 08:57:05 | Re: Hot Standby remaining issues |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2009-12-04 08:37:32 | Re: Hot Standby remaining issues |