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

Re: Sync Rep Design

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Joshua Tolley <eggyknap(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Aidan Van Dyk <aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca>, Robert Treat <rob(at)xzilla(dot)net>, Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Sync Rep Design
Date: 2010-12-31 11:51:55
Message-ID: 1293796315.1892.37351.camel@ebony (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Thu, 2010-12-30 at 20:26 -0700, Joshua Tolley wrote:
> 2) initiate fsync on the primary first
> >    - In this case, the slave is always slightly behind.  If if your
> > primary falls over, you don't give commit messages to the clients,
> but
> > if it recovers, it might have committed data, and slaves will still
> be
> > able to catch up.
> > 
> > The thing is that currently, even without replication, #2 can
> happen.
> For what little it's worth, I vote for this option, because it's a
> problem that can already happen (as opposed to adding an entirely new
> type of problem to the mix).

This proposal provides #2, so your wish is met.

 Simon Riggs 
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2010-12-31 12:10:36
Subject: Re: Old git repo
Previous:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2010-12-31 11:48:57
Subject: Re: Sync Rep Design

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