| From: | "Fujii Masao" <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Markus Wanner" <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch> |
| Cc: | "ITAGAKI Takahiro" <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Synchronous Log Shipping Replication |
| Date: | 2008-09-10 14:01:00 |
| Message-ID: | 3f0b79eb0809100701q27f13090t63f073a6ecb63e99@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 10:55 PM, Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> ITAGAKI Takahiro wrote:
>>
>> Signals and locking, borrewed from Postgres-R, are now studied
>> for the purpose in the log shipping,
>
> Cool. Let me know if you have any questions WRT this imessages stuff.
If you're sure it's all right, I have a trivial question.
Which signal should we use for the notification to the backend from
WAL sender? The notable signals are already used.
Or, since a backend don't need to wait on select() unlike WAL sender,
ISTM that it's not so inconvenient to use a semaphore for that notification.
Your thought?
regards
--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Markus Wanner | 2008-09-10 14:13:02 | Re: Synchronous Log Shipping Replication |
| Previous Message | Devrim GÜNDÜZ | 2008-09-10 13:44:25 | Re: Keeping creation time of objects |