Re: Synchronous replication - patch status inquiry
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Synchronous replication - patch status inquiry |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1283873023.1834.15272.camel@ebony обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Synchronous replication - patch status inquiry (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Synchronous replication - patch status inquiry
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 2010-09-07 at 10:47 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes: > > On Tue, 2010-09-07 at 09:27 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > >> For the sake of argument, yes that's what I was thinking. Now please > >> explain how *you're* thinking it should work. > > > The WAL is sent from master to standby in 8192 byte chunks, frequently > > including multiple commits. From standby, one reply per chunk. If we > > need to wait for apply while nothing else is received, we do. > > That premise is completely false. SR does not send WAL in page units. > If it did, it would have the same performance problems as the old > WAL-file-at-a-time implementation, just with slightly smaller > granularity. There's no dependence on pages in that proposal, so don't understand. What aspect of the above would you change? and to what? -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.comPostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: