| From: | Andrei Lepikhov <lepihov(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Jack Bonatakis <jack(at)bonatak(dot)is>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Read-only connection mode for AI workflows. |
| Date: | 2026-03-18 14:36:31 |
| Message-ID: | 485a95a4-3220-4165-8be2-9508afd6a0b1@gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 18/3/26 15:26, Andres Freund wrote:
> Regardless of the AI angle it's quite useful to be able to put a server into
> read only mode, e.g. in preparation for a planned failover where you can
> continue to allow reads but don't want any more writes. Or in preparation for
> a shutdown you want to prevent further writes (so the shutdown checkpoint is
> quick), but you do want to allow further reads (to reduce the scope of the
> downtime, by allowing reads while doing a CHECKPOINT before the actual
> shutdown).
It returns us to the question about cluster-wide V/S session-wide
read-only mode. Should we design one of them or consider both? What do
you think?
--
regards, Andrei Lepikhov,
pgEdge
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Daniel Verite | 2026-03-18 14:37:23 | Re: Emitting JSON to file using COPY TO |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2026-03-18 14:33:36 | Re: Serverside SNI support in libpq |