Re: Synchronous replication - patch status inquiry
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Synchronous replication - patch status inquiry |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1283431467.1834.482.camel@ebony обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Synchronous replication - patch status inquiry (Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Synchronous replication - patch status inquiry
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 2010-09-02 at 15:15 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > On 02/09/10 15:03, Simon Riggs wrote: > > On Thu, 2010-09-02 at 19:24 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 7:23 PM, Heikki Linnakangas > >> <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > >>> That requirement falls out from the handling of disconnected standbys. If a > >>> standby is not connected, what does the master do with commits? If the > >>> answer is anything else than acknowledge them to the client immediately, as > >>> if the standby never existed, the master needs to know what standby servers > >>> exist. Otherwise it can't know if all the standbys are connected or not. > >> > >> Thanks. I understood why the registration is required. > > > > I don't. There is a simpler design that does not require registration. > > > > Please explain why we need registration, with an explanation that does > > not presume it as a requirement. > > Please explain how you would implement "don't acknowledge commits until > they're replicated to all standbys" without standby registration. "All standbys" has no meaning without registration. It is not a question that needs an answer. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.comPostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: