Re: Sync Replication with transaction-controlled durability

From: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Sync Replication with transaction-controlled durability
Date: 2010-10-08 21:59:30
Message-ID: m239sgibwd.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> It seems like it would be more helpful if you were working on
> implementing a design that had more than one vote. As far as I can
> tell, we have rough consensus that for the first commit we should only
> worry about the case where k = 1; that is, only one ACK is ever
> required for commit

My understanding by reading the mails here and quick-reading the patch
(in my MUA, that's how quick the reading was), is that what you want
here is what's done in the patch, which has been proposed as a WIP, too.

Regards,
--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marko Tiikkaja 2010-10-08 23:07:25 Re: Review: Fix snapshot taking inconsistencies
Previous Message Robert Haas 2010-10-08 21:44:50 Re: GIN vs. Partial Indexes