From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de> |
Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: recovery_min_apply-delay and remote_apply |
Date: | 2016-09-16 21:55:06 |
Message-ID: | CAEepm=29BEQiWCw7aPTX_TSneuVN3f3gg0cniW5w7C9C=7jjxg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 8:45 AM, Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de> wrote:
> Current PostgreSQL Documentation on recovery.conf has this about
> recovery_min_apply_delay[1]:
>
> ---<---
>
> This parameter is intended for use with streaming replication deployments;
> however, if the parameter is specified it will be honored in all cases.
> Synchronous replication is not affected by this setting because there is
> not yet any setting to request synchronous apply of transaction commits.
>
> --->---
>
> If i understand correctly, this is not true anymore with 9.6, where
> remote_apply will have exactly the behavior the paragraph above wants to
> contradict: any transaction executed with synchronous_commit=remote_apply
> will wait at least recovery_min_apply_delay to finish. Given that
> synchronous_commit can be controlled by any user, this might be dangerous
> if someone doesn't take care enough.
Yes, I missed that sentence. Thanks.
> I think we need a doc patch for that at least, see attached patch against
> master, but 9.6 should have a corrected one, too.
+1
--
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-09-16 23:07:43 | Re: WIP: About CMake v2 |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2016-09-16 21:31:38 | Re: Reminder: Call for Papers -- PGDay Austin 2016 |