Re: standby registration (was: is sync rep stalled?)
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: standby registration (was: is sync rep stalled?) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1286287200.2025.1386.camel@ebony обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: standby registration (was: is sync rep stalled?) (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: standby registration (was: is sync rep stalled?)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 08:57 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 8:34 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 12:45 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > >> >>> Quorum commit, even with configurable vote weights, can't handle a > >> >>> requirement that a particular commit be replicated to (A || B) && (C > >> >>> || D). > >> >> Good point. > > > > Asking for quorum_commit = 3 would cover that requirement. > > > > Not exactly as requested, but in a way that is both simpler to express > > and requires no changes to configuration after failover. ISTM better to > > have a single parameter than 5 separate configuration files, with > > behaviour that the community would not easily be able to validate. > > That's just not the same thing. In what important ways does it differ? In both cases, no reply will be received until both sites have confirmed receipt. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.comPostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: