| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Update of replication/README |
| Date: | 2011-03-09 17:00:46 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTimHzxEhgiCKDAtxE8pATkK+z_prz-adin1Yammh@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 6:11 AM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> The attached patch updates replication/README to reflect current
> walsender/walreceiver behavior. It doesn't include any description
> about sync rep. That would need to be added later.
Hrm. What about this hunk?
-Each walsender allocates an entry from the WalSndCtl array, and advertises
-there how far it has streamed WAL already. This is used at checkpoints, to
-avoid recycling WAL that hasn't been streamed to a slave yet. However,
-that doesn't stop such WAL from being recycled when the connection is not
-established.
+Each walsender allocates an entry from the WalSndCtl array, and tracks
+information about replication progress. User can monitor them via
+statistics views.
Is the deleted text not (or no longer) true?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2011-03-09 17:06:02 | Re: How should the waiting backends behave in sync rep? |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-03-09 16:29:36 | Re: wrap alpha4 tomorrow ~9am Eastern (was: Alpha4 release blockers) |