| From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Synchronization levels in SR |
| Date: | 2010-09-08 10:38:01 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTimPcghz_aDmxxh8mAqwMG2ttb8h+o2qkO8dXMVf@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 7:04 PM, Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb(at)cybertec(dot)at> wrote:
> Then there is no use to implement individual sync/async
> replicated transactions, period. An async replicated transaction
> that waits for a sync replicated transaction because of locks
> will become implicitely sync. It just waits for another transactions'
> sync ack.
Hmm.. it's the same with async transaction (i.e., synchronous_commit = false)
and sync one (synchronous_commit = true). Async transaction cannot take the
lock held by sync one until the sync has flushed the WAL.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Marko Kreen | 2010-09-08 10:45:37 | Re: UTF16 surrogate pairs in UTF8 encoding |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2010-09-08 10:35:18 | Re: UTF16 surrogate pairs in UTF8 encoding |