| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: synchronous_commit and remote_write |
| Date: | 2012-05-09 21:37:09 |
| Message-ID: | 20120509213709.GE16881@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 02:23:30PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
>
> > The naming is not arbitrary. -1 to changing it as suggested.
> >
> > It is as Aidan says, a state between receive and fsync, normally
> > referred to as write.
> >
> > Plus the word remote denotes it is on the standby, not the local master.
> >
> > So both words have specific meaning, and IMHO clear meaning.
>
> Clear to a postgres hacker, maybe. Not at *all* clear to our general users.
>
> The natural assumption is that "remote write" means that it's written to
> disk on the remote. Which is not what it means.
Right, and if we are wrapping beta tomorrow, it would be good for us to
decide soon. We can always change it after beta, but sooner is better.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2012-05-09 21:38:07 | Re: synchronous_commit and remote_write |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-05-09 21:34:26 | bgwriter idle-mode behavior (was Re: Latch for the WAL writer) |