| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, fazool mein <fazoolmein(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Synchronous replication - patch status inquiry |
| Date: | 2010-09-02 12:15:17 |
| Message-ID: | 4C7F9555.2000008@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 02/09/10 15:03, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-09-02 at 19:24 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 7:23 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
>> <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>>> That requirement falls out from the handling of disconnected standbys. If a
>>> standby is not connected, what does the master do with commits? If the
>>> answer is anything else than acknowledge them to the client immediately, as
>>> if the standby never existed, the master needs to know what standby servers
>>> exist. Otherwise it can't know if all the standbys are connected or not.
>>
>> Thanks. I understood why the registration is required.
>
> I don't. There is a simpler design that does not require registration.
>
> Please explain why we need registration, with an explanation that does
> not presume it as a requirement.
Please explain how you would implement "don't acknowledge commits until
they're replicated to all standbys" without standby registration.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2010-09-02 12:44:27 | Re: Synchronous replication - patch status inquiry |
| Previous Message | Michael Haggerty | 2010-09-02 12:13:28 | Re: git: uh-oh |