Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Sawada Masahiko <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Beena Emerson <memissemerson(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2
Date: 2015-07-13 12:26:32
Message-ID: CAB7nPqQpRFnikqGDMbtxeEsj6sO40TYHh8D9zESQ+GA8KnEKXQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 9:22 PM, Sawada Masahiko <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I might missing something but, these functions will generate WAL?
> If they does, we will face the situation where we need to wait
> forever, Fujii-san pointed out.

No, those functions are here to manipulate the metadata defining the
quorum/priority set. We definitely do not want something that
generates WAL.
--
Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Uriy Zhuravlev 2015-07-13 12:43:10 Re: WIP: Enhanced ALTER OPERATOR
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2015-07-13 12:24:53 Re: Freeze avoidance of very large table.