Re: An attempt to avoid locally-committed-but-not-replicated-to-standby-transactions in synchronous replication

From: Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, SATYANARAYANA NARLAPURAM <satyanarlapuram(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: An attempt to avoid locally-committed-but-not-replicated-to-standby-transactions in synchronous replication
Date: 2022-04-26 11:22:38
Message-ID: 0F911A3B-FC1B-4F01-89F3-C2368870DB90@yandex-team.ru
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> 25 апр. 2022 г., в 21:48, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> написал(а):
>
> I'm personally in
> favor of just adding a GUC that can be enabled to block canceling
> synchronous replication waits

+1. I think it's the only option to provide quorum commit guarantees.

Best regards, Andrey Borodin.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jiří Fejfar 2022-04-26 11:55:14 Re: variable filename for psql \copy
Previous Message Jian He 2022-04-26 09:16:13 range of composite types!