From: | "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Tatsuo Ishii" <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch, masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com, aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca, heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Sync Rep: First Thoughts on Code |
Date: | 2008-12-14 18:06:57 |
Message-ID: | 603c8f070812141006u13fd801cg99ed1930032f5a14@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> We can make the reply to a commit message when any of the following
> events have occurred
>
> 1. We sent the message to standby
> 2. We received the message on standby
> 3. We wrote the WAL to the WAL file
> 4. We fsync'd the WAL file
> 5. We CRC checked the WAL commit record
> 6. We applied the WAL commit record
Also
0. The same time we would have done so if replication had not been
configured at all.
I think the basic problem here is that we can talk about "asynchronous
replication" and "synchronous replication" but there are n>2
possible/useful behaviors (I would guess principally 0, 2, 4, and 6,
but YMMV). So we're going to need some way to clarify what we mean.
BTW, in case my previous emails on this topic might have given someone
the contrary impression, I'm not really that worked up about this
either. Interesting? Yes. Have opinions? Yes. Lie awake nights
worrying about it? Nope. :-)
...Robert
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-12-14 18:16:03 | Re: [SQL] array_to_string(anyarray, text) that was working in 8.1 is not working in 8.3 |
Previous Message | Mark Mielke | 2008-12-14 17:57:24 | Re: Sync Rep: First Thoughts on Code |