On Fri, 2008-09-12 at 12:25 +0100, Gregory Stark wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
>
> > 3. Ignore problem
> > Effects:
> > * Long running queries on standby...
> > Have no effect on primary
> > Do not delay apply of WAL records on standby
> > * Queries on standby give inconsistent answers in some cases, though
> > doesn't generate any messages to show inconsistency occurred. Acceptable
> > for read-only and insert only tables only.
>
> This seems like a non-starter.
It works, and is proposed as a non-default option since a number of
people have independently said to me that this would be
acceptable/preferred.
> Your comment about read-only and insert-only tuples only seems to make sense
> if you assume there are other tables being updated simultaneously. Otherwise
> of course there would be no WAL records for tuple removals.
Yeh, you got it.
-- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.comPostgreSQL Training, Services and Support