From: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch>, ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Synchronous Log Shipping Replication |
Date: | 2008-09-09 14:17:34 |
Message-ID: | 48C6857E.4000402@enterprisedb.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 08:24 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> "Agreed"? That last restriction is a deal-breaker.
>
>> OK, I should have said *if wal_buffers are full* XLogInsert() cannot
>> advance to a new page while we are waiting to send or write. So I don't
>> think its a deal breaker.
>
> Oh, OK, that's obvious --- there's no place to put more data.
Each WAL sender can keep at most one page locked at a time, right? So,
that should never happen if wal_buffers > 1 + n_wal_senders.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2008-09-09 14:40:14 | Re: Common Table Expressions (WITH RECURSIVE) patch |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2008-09-09 14:16:15 | Re: Synchronous Log Shipping Replication |