Re: Sync Rep: First Thoughts on Code
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Sync Rep: First Thoughts on Code |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1228471768.20796.602.camel@hp_dx2400_1 обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Sync Rep: First Thoughts on Code ("Fujii Masao" <masao.fujii@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Sync Rep: First Thoughts on Code
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 2008-12-05 at 12:09 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: > On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 6:29 PM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > The only sensible settings are > > synchronous_commit = on, synchronous_replication = on > > synchronous_commit = on, synchronous_replication = off > > synchronous_commit = off, synchronous_replication = off > > > > This doesn't make any sense: (does it??) > > synchronous_commit = off, synchronous_replication = on > > If the standby replies before writing the WAL, that strategy can improve > the performance with moderate reliability, and sounds sensible. Do you think it likely that your replication time is consistently and noticeably less than your time-to-disk? If not, you'll wait just as long but be less robust. I guess its possible. On a related thought: presumably we force a sync rep if forceSyncCommit is set? > IIRC, MySQL Cluster might use that strategy. Not the most convincing argument I've heard. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.comPostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: