| From: | Jaime Casanova <jaime(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Synchronous standby |
| Date: | 2011-02-23 17:09:15 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTin=V0jYszMeUPRCfpYHZOZinGonpR1Au9gfe3m3@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 3:49 AM, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org> wrote:
> In 9.1, we will be able to have synchrnous replication. Also we have
> one standby server chosen by primary to be the synchronous standby
> (still I'm not sure this is correct or not as stated in another mail).
>
yes, it is. a list of possible synch standbys and one of them chosen
to be the one
> Is there anyway to know which is the synchronous standby? IMO this is
> important for users because that one is likely the least behind to
> primary and will be chosen to promoto in case of primary dying in most
> cases.
i guess, we can put a new column in pg_stat_replication stating the
type of the replication (synch or asynch).
but that is surely a different patch...
--
Jaime Casanova www.2ndQuadrant.com
Professional PostgreSQL: Soporte y capacitación de PostgreSQL
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2011-02-23 17:18:58 | Re: Correctly producing array literals for prepared statements |
| Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2011-02-23 16:43:19 | Re: How to extract a value from a record using attnum or attname? |