Re: Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Vik Fearing <vik(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.
Date: 2016-12-20 05:46:36
Message-ID: CAB7nPqQUBAaHMs+cuDSsET8nxXEZ5E9VN7gDO3j0Dm8ms032SQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Do we need to consider the sorting method and the selecting k-th
> latest LSN method?

Honestly, nah. Tests are showing that there are many more bottlenecks
before that with just memory allocation and parsing.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fujii Masao 2016-12-20 05:56:45 Re: invalid combination of options "-D - -F t -X stream" in pg_basebackup
Previous Message amul sul 2016-12-20 05:41:36 Re: pg_background contrib module proposal