Re: Hot Standby (v9d)

On Wed, 2009-01-28 at 19:27 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
> "my failover was 12 hours behind when I needed it to be 10 seconds
>  behind and I lost a $1 million because of downtime of Postgres"

The same could be said for warm standby right now. Or Slony-I, for that
matter. I think that we can reasonably expect anyone implementing
asynchronous replication for HA to properly monitor the lag time.

There are many sources of latency in the process, so I don't think
anyone can expect 10 seconds without actually monitoring to verify what
the actual lag time is.

I apologize if my post is based on ignorance, I haven't followed your
patch as closely as others involved in this discussion.

Regards,Jeff Davis