Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add new replication mode
synchronous_commit = 'write'.
From:
Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>
To:
Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc:
Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jaime Casanova <jaime(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject:
Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add new replication mode
synchronous_commit = 'write'.
On 14 April 2012 15:58, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 4:16 AM, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> wrote:
>> I have a question though. What happens when this is set to "write"
>> (or "remote_write" as proposed) but it's being used on a standalone
>> primary? At the moment it's not documented what level of guarantee
>> this would provide.
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/warm-standby.html#SYNCHRONOUS-REPLICATION-HA
> -----------------
> Commits made when synchronous_commit is set to on or write will
> wait until the synchronous standby responds. The response may
> never occur if the last, or only, standby should crash.
> -----------------
>
> Is this description not enough? If not enough, how should we change
> the document?
No, that's not what I was referring to. If you don't have a standby
(i.e. a single, isolated database cluster with no replication), and
its synchronous_commit is set to 'remote_write', what effect does that
have?
--
Thom
