must synchronous_standby_names be set?

From: "Erik Rijkers" <er(at)xs4all(dot)nl>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: must synchronous_standby_names be set?
Date: 2011-07-01 13:42:39
Message-ID: 7889ee895b67b822079b6e09a1b93f3e.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I'm testing synchronous replication on 9.2devel - both instances are on a single machine.

The primary shows synchronous_commit = on
and synchronous_standby_names = ''.

The standby receives updates fine.

Now, does the 'synchronous_commit = on' absolutely mean that the session is sync-replicating?
Could it be non-synchronously replicating?

If so, this information in the manual seems wrong:

"
25.2.6.1. Basic Configuration

Once streaming replication has been configured, configuring synchronous replication requires only
one additional configuration step: synchronous_standby_names must be set to a non-empty value.
"
( the 'must be set' part )

Two questions:

1. How to query a session to make absolutely sure that replication is actually synchronous?

2. Does sync-repl really need synchronous_standby_names to be set?

Thank you,

Erik Rijkers

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2011-07-01 14:32:08 Re: relpersistence and temp table
Previous Message Amit Khandekar 2011-07-01 12:06:20 relpersistence and temp table