| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Hot Standby query cancellation and Streaming Replication integration |
| Date: | 2010-02-26 22:20:37 |
| Message-ID: | 201002262220.o1QMKbD00176@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > Doesn't the system already adjust the delay based on the length of slave
> > transactions, e.g. max_standby_delay. It seems there is no need for a
> > user switch --- just max_standby_delay really high.
>
> Well that GUC looks like it allows to set a compromise between HA and
> reporting, not to say "do not ever give the priority to the replay while
> I'm running my reports". At least that's how I understand it.
Well, if you set it high, it effectively is that.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
PG East: http://www.enterprisedb.com/community/nav-pg-east-2010.do
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-02-26 22:40:06 | Re: Avoiding bad prepared-statement plans. |
| Previous Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2010-02-26 22:11:28 | Re: Hot Standby query cancellation and Streaming Replication integration |