| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com, bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com, satyanarlapuram(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Allow async standbys wait for sync replication |
| Date: | 2022-03-14 17:00:23 |
| Message-ID: | 20220314170023.dg4ubntz4s6hzhxg@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2022-03-14 11:30:02 +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> That is, (as my understanding) async standbys are required to allow
> overwriting existing unreplayed records after reconnection. But,
> putting aside how to remember that LSN, if that happens at a segment
> boundary, the async replica may run into the similar situation with
> the missing-contrecord case. But standby cannot insert any original
> record to get out from that situation.
I do not see how that problem arrises on standbys when they aren't allowed to
read those records. It'll just wait for more data to arrive.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2022-03-14 17:02:20 | Re: refactoring basebackup.c (zstd workers) |
| Previous Message | Matthias van de Meent | 2022-03-14 16:57:23 | Re: Non-replayable WAL records through overflows and >MaxAllocSize lengths |