Re: Synchronous commit behavior during network outage

From: Maksim Milyutin <milyutinma(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com>, Ondřej Žižka <ondrej(dot)zizka(at)stratox(dot)cz>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Synchronous commit behavior during network outage
Date: 2021-04-20 18:18:12
Message-ID: 301efe16-11c6-69e3-6a0e-e0ab4a5a73ec@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On 20.04.2021 19:38, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>
> On 4/20/21 6:23 PM, Aleksander Alekseev wrote:
>> Hi Ondřej,
>>
>> Thanks for the report. It seems to be a clear violation of what is
>> promised in the docs. Although it's unlikely that someone implemented
>> an application which deals with important data and "pressed Ctr+C" as
>> it's done in psql. So this might be not such a critical issue after
>> all. BTW what version of PostgreSQL are you using?
>>
> Which part of the docs does this contradict?

I think, Aleksandr refers to the following phrase in docs:

"The guarantee we offer is that the application will not receive
explicit acknowledgment of the successful commit of a transaction until
the WAL data is known to be safely received by all the synchronous
standbys." [1]

And IMO confusing here regards to the notion of `successful commit`.
Does warning attached to received commit message make it not
*successful*? I think we have to explicitly mention cases about
cancellation and termination session in docs to avoid ambiguity in
understanding of phrase above.

1.
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/warm-standby.html#SYNCHRONOUS-REPLICATION-HA

--
Regards,
Maksim Milyutin

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2021-04-20 18:23:08 Re: when the startup process doesn't
Previous Message Ondřej Žižka 2021-04-20 18:05:31 Re: Synchronous commit behavior during network outage