From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make a hard state change from catchup to streaming mode. |
Date: | 2011-02-22 19:29:26 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTikGg2LuXHjeuXdkQOBzqO=YfvFoZu0v2uAWG0Qs@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 11:50 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 10:41 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>>> On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 10:09 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>>>> Make a hard state change from catchup to streaming mode.
>>>> More useful state change for monitoring purposes, plus a
>>>> required change for synchronous replication patch.
>>
>>> As far as I can see, this patch was not posted or discussed before
>>> commit, and I'm not sure it's the behavior everyone wants. It has the
>>> effect of preventing the system from ever going backwards from
>>> "streaming" to "catchup". Is that what we want?
>>
>> That seems like a very bad idea from here. Being able to go back to
>> catchup after loss of the streaming connection is essential for
>> robustness. If we now have to restart the slave for that to happen,
>> it's not an improvement.
>
> No, that's not the case where it matters. The state would get reset
> on reconnect. The problem is when, say, the master server is
> generating WAL at a rate which exceeds the network bandwidth of the
> link between the master and the standby. The previous coding will
> make us flip back into the catchup state when that happens.
>
> Actually, the old code is awfully sensitive, and knowing that you are
> not caught up is not really enough information: you need to know how
> far behind you are, and how long you've been behind for. I'm guessing
> that Simon intended this patch to deal with that problem, but it's not
> the right fix.
So am I the only one who thinks this needs to be reverted?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2011-02-22 19:49:19 | pgsql: Fix a couple of unlogged tables goofs. |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-02-22 18:08:56 | pgsql: Allow binary I/O of type "void". |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jaime Casanova | 2011-02-22 19:43:29 | Re: Sync Rep v17 |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-02-22 18:09:24 | Re: Void binary patch |