Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add new replication mode synchronous_commit = 'write'.

From: Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>
To: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jaime Casanova <jaime(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add new replication mode synchronous_commit = 'write'.
Date: 2012-04-17 12:52:00
Message-ID: CAA-aLv7NV-bAJ-u_knsg9BU16M=98WtCtU3ytdzzQd8Esb5s1w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers

On 16 April 2012 17:21, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 12:13 AM, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> wrote:
>> No, that's not what I was referring to.  If you don't have a standby
>> (i.e. a single, isolated database cluster with no replication), and
>> its synchronous_commit is set to 'remote_write', what effect does that
>> have?
>
> It's the same effect as 'on' and 'local' do, i.e., transaction commit waits
> for only local WAL flush. This behavior is not documented explicitly...
> How should we change the document? What about adding the following
> into the explanation of synchronous_commit parameter (maybe the end
> of second paragraph of that)?
>
> -----------------
> If synchronous_standby_names is not set, on, remote_write and local
> provide the same synchronization level; transaction commit only waits for
> local flush.
> -----------------

Yes, that sounds fine.

--
Thom

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-committers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2012-04-17 13:34:42 pgsql: Don't wait for the commit record to be replicated if we wrote no
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2012-04-16 19:41:40 pgsql: Add compatibility information for prepared transaction commands

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Atri Sharma 2012-04-17 13:12:48 Re: [JDBC] Regarding GSoc Application
Previous Message Kyotaro HORIGUCHI 2012-04-17 12:38:59 Re: [BUG] Checkpointer on hot standby runs without looking checkpoint_segments