| From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Joshua Tolley <eggyknap(at)gmail(dot)com>, Yeb Havinga <yebhavinga(at)gmail(dot)com>, Aidan Van Dyk <aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Synchronous replication |
| Date: | 2010-08-02 11:06:28 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTimVz-849Fn1xCc=OCmg9YMXsnLxS-2Qy3ykzZPG@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 7:53 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Let's not get *the manner of specifying the policy* confused with *the
> need to update the policy when the master changes*. It doesn't seem
> likely you would want the same value for synchronous_standbys on all
> your machines. In the most common configuration, you'd probably have:
>
> on A: synchronous_standbys=B
> on B: synchronous_standbys=A
Oh, true. But, what if we have another synchronous standby called C?
We specify the policy as follows?:
on A: synchronous_standbys=B,C
on B: synchronous_standbys=A,C
on C: synchronous_standbys=A,B
We would need to change the setting on both A and B when we want to
change the name of the third standby from C to D, for example. No?
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Boszormenyi Zoltan | 2010-08-02 11:25:48 | Re: lock_timeout GUC patch - Review |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-08-02 10:58:56 | Re: Postgres as Historian |