Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: is sync rep stalled?

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Aidan Van Dyk" <aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca>
Cc: "Fujii Masao" <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: is sync rep stalled?
Date: 2010-09-30 14:09:59
Message-ID: (view raw or whole thread)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Aidan Van Dyk <aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca> wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>> I'm sure there's several things you can accomplish with
>> synchronous replication, perhaps you could describe what the
>> important use case for you is?
> I'm looking for "data durability", not "server query-ability"
Same here.  If we used synchronous replication, the important thing
for us would be to hold up the master for the minimum time required
to ensure remote persistence -- not actual application to the remote
database.  We could tolerate some WAL replay time on recovery better
than poor commit performance on the master.

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Heikki LinnakangasDate: 2010-09-30 14:23:49
Subject: Re: is sync rep stalled?
Previous:From: David FetterDate: 2010-09-30 14:06:56
Subject: Re: is sync rep stalled?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2015 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group