Re: max_standby_delay considered harmful

From: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
To: Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Subject: Re: max_standby_delay considered harmful
Date: 2010-05-09 16:47:51
Message-ID: s2h407d949e1005090947s7bbab437v1b2acd8a67e6b066@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 4:00 AM, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>  The use cases are covered as best they can be without better support from
> expected future SR features like heartbeats and XID loopback.

For what it's worth I think deferring these extra complications is a
very useful exercise. I would like to see a system that doesn't depend
on them for basic functionality. In particular I would like to see a
system that can be useful using purely WAL log shipping without
streaming replication at all.

I'm a bit unclear how the boolean proposal would solve things though.
Surely if you set the boolean to recovery-wins then when using
streaming replication with any non-idle master virtually every query
would be cancelled immediately as every HOT cleanup would cause a
snapshot conflict with even short-lived queires in the slave.

--
greg

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2010-05-09 16:52:37 Re: max_standby_delay considered harmful
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-05-09 15:42:32 Re: 9.0b1: "ERROR: btree index keys must be ordered by attribute"