| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, 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 15:26:26 |
| Message-ID: | 48C695A2.3010707@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs wrote:
> Don't understand. I am referring to the logic at the top of
> AdvanceXLInsertBuffer(). We would need to wait for all people reading
> the contents of wal_buffers.
Oh, I see.
If a slave falls behind, how does it catch up? I guess you're saying
that it can't fall behind, because the master will block before that
happens. Also in asynchronous replication? And what about when the slave
is first set up, and needs to catch up with the master?
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2008-09-09 15:43:18 | Re: Synchronous Log Shipping Replication |
| Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2008-09-09 15:21:33 | Re: Common Table Expressions (WITH RECURSIVE) patch |