Re: Keepalive for max_standby_delay

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Greg Stark
Тема Re: Keepalive for max_standby_delay
Дата
Msg-id AANLkTil0gaKqJjqpoyBlSD3dZnUETQM35updVcfmMQk_@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Keepalive for max_standby_delay  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 4:18 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu> writes:
>> On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 12:11 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>> It is off-base.  The receiver does not "request" data, the sender is
>>> what determines how much WAL is sent when.
>
>> Hm, so what happens if the slave blocks, doesn't the sender block when
>> the kernel buffers fill up?
>
> Well, if the slave can't keep up, that's a separate problem.  It will
> not fail to keep up as a result of the transmission mechanism.

No, I mean if the slave is paused due to a conflict. Does it stop
reading data from the master or does it buffer it up on disk? If it
stops reading it from the master then the effect is the same as if the
slave stopped "requesting" data even if there's no actual request.


--
greg


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Bruce Momjian
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Allow wal_keep_segments to keep all segments
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Keepalive for max_standby_delay