| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, Mark Mielke <mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: "Hot standby"? |
| Date: | 2009-08-11 23:30:07 |
| Message-ID: | 200908112330.n7BNU7X17673@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 4:07 PM, Josh Berkus<josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
> > So really, the "streaming replication" patch should be called "hot
> > standby",
>
> No. AIUI, hot standby means that when your primary falls over, the
> secondary automatically promotes itself and takes over. It requires
> things like heartbeat monitoring and STONITH and is unrelated to
> anything we currently have under consideration.
>
> > and the "hot standby" patch should be called "read only slaves"?
>
> Yes.
>
> > And *why* can't we call it log-based replication?
>
> Well, we can call it anything we want. For example, up until now
> we've been calling it "hot standby", even though that's clearly wrong.
> :-)
How about "streaming archive logging" for synchronous replication, and
"continuous archive slave" for read-only queries on a warm standby.
--
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 | Greg Stark | 2009-08-12 00:10:01 | Re: pgindent timing (was Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Refactor NUM_cache_remove calls in error report path to a PG_TRY) |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2009-08-11 23:23:44 | Re: WIP: getting rid of the pg_database flat file |