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

Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Efficient transaction-controlled synchronous replication.

From: Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch>
To: Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
Cc: MARK CALLAGHAN <mdcallag(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Aidan Van Dyk <aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Efficient transaction-controlled synchronous replication.
Date: 2011-03-18 14:37:26
Message-ID: 4D836E26.6080503@bluegap.ch (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committerspgsql-hackers
Hi,

On 03/18/2011 02:40 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Then the only thing you would consider sync replication, as far as I
> can see, is two phase commit

I think waiting for the ACK before actually making the changes from the
transaction visible (COMMIT) would suffice for disallowing such an
inconsistency to manifest.  But obviously, MySQL decided it's not worth
doing that, as it's such a rare event and a short period of time that
may show inconsistencies...

> people's needs.  The guarantee that some people are looking for is
> that a successful commit means that the data has been persisted on
> two separate servers.

Well, MySQL's semi-sync also seems to guarantee that WRT the client
confirmation.  And transactions always appear committed *before* the
client receives the COMMIT acknowledgement, due to the time it takes for
the ACK to arrive at the client.

It's just the commit *before* receiving the slave's ACK, which might
make a transaction visible that's not durable, yet.  But I guess that
simplified implementation for them...

Regards

Markus Wanner

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Thom BrownDate: 2011-03-18 14:41:51
Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix various possible problems with synchronous replication.
Previous:From: homDate: 2011-03-18 14:34:53
Subject: Re: I am confused after reading codes of PostgreSQL three week

pgsql-committers by date

Next:From: Thom BrownDate: 2011-03-18 14:41:51
Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix various possible problems with synchronous replication.
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2011-03-18 14:23:39
Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix various possible problems with synchronous replication.

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group