Re: Synchronous Log Shipping Replication
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Synchronous Log Shipping Replication |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1220963957.3913.474.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Synchronous Log Shipping Replication (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Synchronous Log Shipping Replication
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 08:24 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > "Fujii Masao" <masao.fujii@gmail.com> writes: > > On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 5:11 PM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > >> > >> Yes. We should have a LogwrtRqst pointer and LogwrtResult pointer for > >> the send operation. The Write and Send operations can then continue > >> independently of one another. XLogInsert() cannot advance to a new page > >> while we are waiting to send or write. > > > Agreed. > > "Agreed"? That last restriction is a deal-breaker. OK, I should have said *if wal_buffers are full* XLogInsert() cannot advance to a new page while we are waiting to send or write. So I don't think its a deal breaker. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.comPostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: