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

Re: Hot Standby and handling max_standby_delay

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Hot Standby and handling max_standby_delay
Date: 2010-01-18 08:45:54
Message-ID: 1263804354.3642.1550.camel@ebony (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Mon, 2010-01-18 at 08:28 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
> > On Sun, 2010-01-17 at 22:57 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> >>> It would be good if there was a keepalive WAL record with a
> >> timestamp on it generated every N seconds while in streaming mode.
> >>
> >> Yeah, that would help. In streaming replication we could also send
> >> such timestamp as a separate message, not within WAL.
> > 
> > Is that something you're working on?
> No.

How accurate is this now? With regard to remaining items of work.

 Simon Riggs 

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Takahiro ItagakiDate: 2010-01-18 08:55:52
Subject: Re: Partitioning syntax
Previous:From: Greg StarkDate: 2010-01-18 08:37:03
Subject: Re: Bloom index

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group