From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
Cc: | Marko Kreen <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL |
Date: | 2008-05-29 16:20:55 |
Message-ID: | 200805291620.m4TGKtY25944@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers |
Josh Berkus wrote:
> Bruce,
>
> > Another idea I discussed with Tom is having the slave _delay_ applying
> > WAL files until all slave snapshots are ready.
> >
>
> Well, again, that only works for async mode. I personally think that's
> the correct solution for async. But for synch mode, I think we need to
> push the xids back to the master; generally if a user is running in
> synch mode they're concerned about failover time and zero data loss, so
> holding back the WAL files doesn't make sense.
You send the WAL to the slave, but the slave doesn't apply them right
away --- it isn't related to async.
> Also, if you did delay applying WAL files on an async slave, you'd reach
> a point (perhaps after a 6-hour query) where it'd actually be cheaper to
> rebuild the slave than to apply the pent-up WAL files.
True.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Steve Atkins | 2008-05-29 16:22:26 | Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2008-05-29 16:20:49 | Re: State of PostgreSQL, BOF at OSCON? |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Steve Atkins | 2008-05-29 16:22:26 | Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL |
Previous Message | Marko Kreen | 2008-05-29 16:20:37 | Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL |