From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Aidan Van Dyk <aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: synchronous_commit and remote_write |
Date: | 2012-05-09 02:09:15 |
Message-ID: | 20120509020915.GB16881@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 10:04:46PM -0400, Aidan Van Dyk wrote:
> On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 9:13 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> > It seems pretty confusing that synchronous_commit = 'remote_write' means
> > write confirmed to the remote socket, not write to the file system. Is
> > there no better term we could some up with? remote_pipe?
> > remote_transfer?
>
> remote_accept?
>
> And then, I could envision (if it continues down this road):
> off
> local
> remote_accept
> remote_write
> remote_sync
> remote_apply (implies visible to new connections on the standby)
>
> Not saying all off these are necessarily worth it, but they are all
> the various "stages" of WAL processing on the remote...
The _big_ problem with "write" is that we might need that someday to
indicate some other kind of write, e.g. write to kernel, fsync to disk.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Etsuro Fujita | 2012-05-09 02:16:00 | Re: WIP Patch: Selective binary conversion of CSV file foreign tables |
Previous Message | Aidan Van Dyk | 2012-05-09 02:04:46 | Re: synchronous_commit and remote_write |