Re: An attempt to avoid locally-committed-but-not-replicated-to-standby-transactions in synchronous replication

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Dilip Kumar
Тема Re: An attempt to avoid locally-committed-but-not-replicated-to-standby-transactions in synchronous replication
Дата
Msg-id CAFiTN-tzW+pFXGh-NqZCJmBGPsd2EHtvYvSxvsZTH7=cWsdPMw@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: An attempt to avoid locally-committed-but-not-replicated-to-standby-transactions in synchronous replication  (Andrey Borodin <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru>)
Ответы Re: An attempt to avoid locally-committed-but-not-replicated-to-standby-transactions in synchronous replication  (Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Mon, May 9, 2022 at 4:39 PM Andrey Borodin <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru> wrote:

> > On 9 May 2022, at 14:44, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > IMHO, making it wait for some amount of time, based on GUC is not a
> > complete solution.  It is just a hack to avoid the problem in some
> > cases.
>
> Disallowing cancelation of locally committed transactions is not a hack. It's removing of a hack that was erroneously
installedto make backend responsible to Ctrl+C (or client side statement timeout).
 

I might be missing something but based on my understanding the
approach is not disallowing the query cancellation but it is just
adding the configuration for how much to delay before canceling the
query.  That's the reason I mentioned that this is not a guarenteed
solution.  I mean with this configuration value also you can not avoid
problems in all the cases, right?

-- 
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Michael Paquier
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Mark all GUC variable as PGDLLIMPORT
Следующее
От: Bharath Rupireddy
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: An attempt to avoid locally-committed-but-not-replicated-to-standby-transactions in synchronous replication