Re: Proposal for 9.1: WAL streaming from WAL buffers

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Proposal for 9.1: WAL streaming from WAL buffers
Date: 2010-06-16 00:32:08
Message-ID: 4C181B88.6070801@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 6/15/10 5:09 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
>> > In 9.0, I think we can fix this problem by (1) only streaming WAL that
>> > has been fsync'd and
>
> I don't think this is the best solution; it would be a noticeable
> performance penalty on replication.

Actually, there's an even bigger reason not to mandate waiting for
fsync: what if the user turns fsync off?

One can certainly imagine users choosing to rely on their replication
slaves for crash recovery instead of fsync.

--
-- Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://www.pgexperts.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David E. Wheeler 2010-06-16 01:04:07 Re: hstore ==> and deprecate =>
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2010-06-16 00:09:56 Re: Proposal for 9.1: WAL streaming from WAL buffers