Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Hot Standby: Relation-specific deferred conflict resolution

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Hot Standby: Relation-specific deferred conflict resolution
Date: 2010-01-29 08:03:21
Message-ID: 1264752201.24669.15151.camel@ebony (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 08:26 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
> > Conflict resolution improvements are important to include in this
> > release, as discussed many times. Proposal given here
> > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-12/msg01175.php
> > presents a viable design to improve this.
> > 
> > Following patch is a complete working implementation of that design.
> > I'm still testing it, but its worth publishing as early as possible to
> > allow discussion. Not for commit, just yet, but soon.
> 
> Um, you're not considering this for 9.0, are you? I think it's time to
> concentrate on the must-fix issues and fix the rough edges in what we have.

Yes, it is important.

> For example, the "can't start hot standby mode from a shutdown
> checkpoint" issue is a must-fix issue in my opinion, about 10x as
> important as this. When that was last discussed, many others agreed. I
> run into that all the time when testing streaming replication, and every
> time I go "Huh, why isn't the standby opening up for connections?", and
> then, "Ahh, it's this stupid shutdown checkpoint issue again".

That was not the feedback I have received. Nobody has commented on that
to me, though many have commented on the need for the current patch. As
mentioned, I went to the trouble of running a meeting to gain additional
feedback and the result was very clear.

Of course, if we ignore any feature, then someone will say "its that
stupid issue again", but that won't imply we got our priority wrong.

> And the VACUUM FULL issue is still hanging too. 

Yes, that is a must fix.

-- 
 Simon Riggs           www.2ndQuadrant.com


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Guillaume SmetDate: 2010-01-29 08:20:19
Subject: Re: Hot Standby: Relation-specific deferred conflict resolution
Previous:From: Heikki LinnakangasDate: 2010-01-29 07:49:32
Subject: Re: Streaming replication, and walsender during recovery

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group