Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > Well, as Heikki said, a stop-and-go WAL management approach could deal
> > with that use-case. What I'm concerned about here is the complexity,
> > reliability, maintainability of trying to interlock WAL application with
> > slave queries in any sort of fine-grained fashion.
> Some admin functions for Hot Standby were removed from the path to ease
> its integration, there was a pause() and resume() feature.
> I think that offering this explicit control to the user would allow them
> to choose between HA setup and reporting setup easily enough: just pause
> the replay when running the reporting, resume it to get fresh data
> again. If you don't pause, any query can get killed, replay is the
Doesn't the system already adjust the delay based on the length of slave
transactions, e.g. max_standby_delay. It seems there is no need for a
user switch --- just max_standby_delay really high.
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
PG East: http://www.enterprisedb.com/community/nav-pg-east-2010.do
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Gokulakannan Somasundaram||Date: 2010-02-26 21:48:42|
|Subject: Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2010-02-26 21:44:20|
|Subject: Re: Hot Standby query cancellation and Streaming Replication integration |