From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Arseny Sher <ars(at)neon(dot)tech> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Taking into account syncrep position in flush_lsn reported by apply worker |
Date: | 2024-08-13 03:35:48 |
Message-ID: | CAA4eK1L9WetnoZJe5n+w4A6499hZUEFqTF9QPYPkeSSX5205+Q@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Aug 12, 2024 at 3:43 PM Arseny Sher <ars(at)neon(dot)tech> wrote:
>
> Sorry for the poor formatting of the message above, this should be better:
>
> Hey. Currently synchronous_commit is disabled for logical apply worker
> on the ground that reported flush_lsn includes only locally flushed data
> so slot (publisher) preserves everything higher than this, and so in
> case of subscriber restart no data is lost. However, imagine that
> subscriber is made highly available by standby to which synchronous
> replication is enabled. Then reported flush_lsn is ignorant of this
> synchronous replication progress, and in case of failover data loss may
> occur if subscriber managed to ack flush_lsn ahead of syncrep.
>
Won't the same can be achieved by enabling the synchronous_commit
parameter for a subscription?
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2024-08-13 03:49:17 | Re: Cross-version Compatibility of postgres_fdw |
Previous Message | Fujii Masao | 2024-08-13 03:15:01 | Re: Cross-version Compatibility of postgres_fdw |