From: | Jacob Biesinger <jake(dot)biesinger(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: serializable master and non-serializable hot standby: feasible set up? |
Date: | 2024-10-16 19:28:04 |
Message-ID: | CAHYXj6f0X4CU+xzTZRHmA_0b+99CnLUHu8fabbPVW4XL1qw0yQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 9:23 PM Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>
wrote:
> On Tue, 2024-10-15 at 16:27 -0700, Jacob Biesinger wrote:
> > *would you* expect to be able to stand up a `repeatable read` replica
> against a
> > `serializable` master? My expectation is that you'd simply change the
> setting in
> > a .conf file on the replica and be good to go; is there something that
> would make
> > this process really difficult / impossible?
>
> I expect that to work fine, at least I cannot think of a problem with such
> a setup.
> But I have been wrong before, so test it.
>
The setup (serializable master, repeatable read replica) definitely works
-- we've been running that way for over a year now. I guess I'm really
asking "how would you go about getting the replica into the appropriate
state?" Would you expect to have to downgrade the master's isolation level
as I describe? Or would you expect to be able to stand up the replica using
a modified conf file initially?
Thanks as always for your help!
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andy Hartman | 2024-10-16 19:37:39 | Backup |
Previous Message | Jacob Biesinger | 2024-10-16 19:24:32 | Re: serializable master and non-serializable hot standby: feasible set up? |