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

Re: How should the waiting backends behave in sync rep?

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: How should the waiting backends behave in sync rep?
Date: 2011-03-09 17:06:02
Message-ID: AANLkTimDUiRrrWzZ2ZXWSRfeP5tHm9PGmpp6zfqaFpte@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> How should the backends waiting for replication behave when
> synchrnous_standby_names
> is set to '' and the configuration file is reloaded? Now they keep
> waiting for the ACK from the
> standby. But I think that it's more natural for them to get out of the
> wait state and complete
> the transaction in that case. If we'll change them in that way, we
> would no longer need
> something like "pg_ctl standalone" which I mentioned in another thread. Thought?

I think so.  Looking at assign_synchronous_standby_names, the
following code just looks wrong:

        if (doit && list_length(elemlist) > 0)
                sync_standbys_defined = true;

Once sync_standbys_defined becomes true, there's no way for it to ever
become false again.  That can't be right.  That means that if you
disable sync rep by zeroing out synchronous_standby_names, backends
that already existed at the time you made the change will continue to
act as though sync rep is enabled until they exit.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Kevin GrittnerDate: 2011-03-09 17:30:49
Subject: Re: wrap alpha4 tomorrow ~9am Eastern (was: Alpha4 release blockers)
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2011-03-09 17:00:46
Subject: Re: Update of replication/README

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