Skip site navigation (1)
Skip section navigation (2)
Peripheral Links
Re: Hot standby documentation
On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 10:34 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote: > Ahh, good point. I had not considered the table would change. What I > did was to mark "Slaves accept read-only queries" as "Hot only". Can the "warm standby" still reside in v9.0? If not, the mark of "Hot only" seems odd for me. > I did not change "Master failure will never lose data" because the 9.0 > streaming implementation is not sychronous (see wal_sender_delay in > postgresql.conf), and I don't think even setting that to zero makes the > operation synchronous. I think we will have to wait for PG 9.1 for > _synchronous_ streaming replication. You are right. Regards, -- Fujii Masao NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center
In response to
- Re: Hot standby documentation at 2010-02-08 13:34:06 from Bruce Momjian
Responses
- Re: Hot standby documentation at 2010-02-09 04:32:31 from Bruce Momjian
pgsql-hackers by date
Next: From: Andrew Dunstan Date: 2010-02-09 01:07:00 Subject: buildfarm breakage Previous: From: Tom Lane Date: 2010-02-09 00:35:43 Subject: Re: Order of operations in lazy_vacuum_rel