On 2014-01-10 10:59:23 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> On 01/10/2014 07:47 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> >I know there was a desire to remove this TODO item, but I think we have
> >brought up enough new issues that we can keep it to see if we can come
> >up with a solution. I have added a link to this discussion on the TODO
> >item.
> >
> >I think we will need at least four new GUC variables:
> >
> >* timeout control for degraded mode
> >* command to run during switch to degraded mode
> >* command to run during switch from degraded mode
> >* read-only variable to report degraded mode
> >
>
> I know I am the one that instigated all of this so I want to be very clear
> on what I and what I am confident that my customers would expect.
>
> If a synchronous slave goes down, the master continues to operate. That is
> all. I don't care if it is configurable (I would be fine with that). I don't
> care if it is not automatic (e.g; slave goes down and we have to tell the
> master to continue).
Would you please explain, as precise as possible, what the advantages of
using a synchronous standby would be in such a scenario?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
-- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services