From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Sync Rep v19 |
Date: | 2011-03-04 14:15:50 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTinW_vj24e=e7-aPXT+qwUmtruVN1sZHj-WMVgtP@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 7:51 PM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> + if (walsnd->pid != 0 &&
>> + walsnd->sync_standby_priority > 0 &&
>> + (priority == 0 ||
>> + priority < walsnd->sync_standby_priority))
>> + {
>> + priority = walsnd->sync_standby_priority;
>> + syncWalSnd = walsnd;
>> + }
>>
>> According to the code, the last named standby has highest priority. But the
>> document says the opposite.
>
> Priority is a difficult word here since "1" is the highest priority. I
> deliberately avoided using the word "highest" in the code for that
> reason.
>
> The code above finds the lowest non-zero standby, which is correct as
> documented.
Hmm.. that seems to find the highest standby. And, I could confirm
that in my box. Please see the following. The priority (= 2) of
synchronous standby (its sync_state is SYNC) is higher than that (= 1)
of potential one (its sync_state is POTENTIAL).
postgres=# SHOW synchronous_standby_names ;
synchronous_standby_names
---------------------------
one, two
(1 row)
postgres=# SELECT application_name, state, sync_priority, sync_state
FROM pg_stat_replication;
application_name | state | sync_priority | sync_state
------------------+-----------+---------------+------------
one | STREAMING | 1 | POTENTIAL
two | STREAMING | 2 | SYNC
(2 rows)
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Yeb Havinga | 2011-03-04 14:23:51 | Re: pg_basebackup and wal streaming |
Previous Message | Yeb Havinga | 2011-03-04 13:57:46 | Re: Sync Rep v19 |