| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Horizontal scalability/sharding |
| Date: | 2015-09-03 16:14:21 |
| Message-ID: | 20150903161421.GL27649@awork2.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2015-09-03 12:10:08 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 6:57 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> > Yes, I assumed that. Logical replication uses WAL, so if you are
> > synchronous with WAL, logical replication is synchronous too. However,
> > of course, it is synchronous in being durable, not synchronous in terms
> > of applying the WAL. This is true of binary and logical replication.
Actually that's not really true - it's just a question which LSNs you
return. For UDR/BDR the relevant LSN is the LSN of the last durably
committed transaction. And thus they wait for apply, not anything else.
> But, Thomas Munro is fixing it!
+ many to that effort.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | dinesh kumar | 2015-09-03 16:15:52 | [PROPOSAL] Inputs on forcing VACUUM VERBOSE to write timestamp |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2015-09-03 16:10:08 | Re: Horizontal scalability/sharding |