| From: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Fujii Masao" <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Aidan Van Dyk" <aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: is sync rep stalled? |
| Date: | 2010-09-30 14:27:51 |
| Message-ID: | 4CA458170200002500036194@gw.wicourts.gov |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> You do realize that to be able to guarantee zero data loss, the
> master will have to stop committing new transactions if the
> streaming stops for any reason, like a network glitch. Maybe
> that's a tradeoff you want, but I'm asking because that point
> isn't clear to many people.
Yeah, I get that. I do think the quorum approach or some simplified
special case of it would be important for us -- possibly even a
requirement -- for that reason.
-Kevin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2010-09-30 14:32:26 | Re: Standby registration |
| Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2010-09-30 14:24:29 | Re: Using streaming replication as log archiving |