| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jesper Pedersen <jesper(dot)pedersen(at)redhat(dot)com>, Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_receivewal documentation |
| Date: | 2019-07-22 01:48:51 |
| Message-ID: | 20190722014851.GC1757@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 02:04:03PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> You could just say something like:
>
> Since pg_receivewal does not apply WAL, you should not allow it to
> become a synchronous standby when synchronous_commit = remote_apply.
> If it does, it will appear to be a standby which never catches up,
> which may cause commits to block. To avoid this, you should either
> configure an appropriate value for synchronous_standby_names, or
> specify an application_name for pg_receivewal that does not match it,
> or change the value of synchronous_commit to something other than
> remote_apply.
>
> I think that'd be a lot more useful than enumerating the total-failure
> scenarios.
+1. Thanks for the suggestions! Your wording looks good to me.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tsunakawa, Takayuki | 2019-07-22 02:21:16 | RE: Speed up transaction completion faster after many relations are accessed in a transaction |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2019-07-22 01:21:04 | Re: Speed up transaction completion faster after many relations are accessed in a transaction |