| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Sync Replication with transaction-controlled durability |
| Date: | 2010-10-09 00:40:03 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTin=fHmtx0LQqf=JEj834=DfHvWC-8Csptcx6c-9@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 5:59 PM, Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> It seems like it would be more helpful if you were working on
>> implementing a design that had more than one vote. As far as I can
>> tell, we have rough consensus that for the first commit we should only
>> worry about the case where k = 1; that is, only one ACK is ever
>> required for commit
>
> My understanding by reading the mails here and quick-reading the patch
> (in my MUA, that's how quick the reading was), is that what you want
> here is what's done in the patch, which has been proposed as a WIP, too.
It's not.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Brendan Jurd | 2010-10-09 01:04:21 | Docs for archive_cleanup_command are poor |
| Previous Message | Marko Tiikkaja | 2010-10-08 23:07:25 | Re: Review: Fix snapshot taking inconsistencies |