From: | John H <johnhyvr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Allow logical failover slots to wait on synchronous replication |
Date: | 2024-09-21 00:53:39 |
Message-ID: | CA+-JvFu7fMEsqh_huwYPgvvHKr+XJA6atb4FkB4GGpfMgVvEXg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On Mon, Sep 16, 2024 at 2:25 AM shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > >
> > > If we don't do something similar, then aren't there chances that we
> > > keep on waiting on the wrong lsn[mode] for the case when mode =
> > > SYNC_REP_WAIT_APPLY while sync-rep-wait infrastructure is updating
> > > different mode's lsn. Is my understanding correct?
> > >
Let me take a deeper look at this, I think you're right though.
>
> I agree. So even if the mode is SYNC_REP_WAIT_WRITE (lower one) or
> SYNC_REP_WAIT_APPLY (higher one), we need to wait for
> lsn[SYNC_REP_WAIT_FLUSH].
>
I'm not sure if I agree with that. I think the sychronous_commit mode should be
a good enough proxy for what the user wants from a durability
perspective for their
application.
For an application writing to the database, if they've set mode as
SYNC_REP_WAIT_WRITE
as fine being when a commit is treated as durable, why do we need to
be concerned
with overriding that to SYNC_REP_WAIT_FLUSH?
Similarly, if a user has mode set to SYNC_REP_WAIT_APPLY, to me it's even more
confusing that there can be scenarios where the application wouldn't
see the data as committed
nor would subsequent reads but a logical consumer would be able to.
The database should be
treated as the source of truth and I don't think logical consumers
should be ever ahead of
what the database is treating as committed.
Thanks,
--
John Hsu - Amazon Web Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | John H | 2024-09-21 01:04:24 | Re: Allow logical failover slots to wait on synchronous replication |
Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2024-09-21 00:28:51 | Re: Refactor: allow pg_strncoll(), etc., to accept -1 length for NUL-terminated cstrings. |