From: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Vik Fearing <vik(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication. |
Date: | 2016-12-20 05:31:32 |
Message-ID: | CAD21AoCsEqGXw7RGL2eYs6Dys06wfhE9bdoF1EiUYJ+ivEju2Q@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 9:49 PM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 9:36 PM, Michael Paquier
> <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 10:42 PM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> Attached is the modified version of the patch. Barring objections, I will
>>> commit this version.
>>
>> There is a whitespace:
>> $ git diff master --check
>> src/backend/replication/syncrep.c:39: trailing whitespace.
>> + *
>
> Okey, pushed the patch with this fix. Thanks!
Thank you for reviewing and commit!
> Regarding this feature, there are some loose ends. We should work on
> and complete them until the release.
>
> (1)
> Which synchronous replication method, priority or quorum, should be
> chosen when neither FIRST nor ANY is specified in s_s_names? Right now,
> a priority-based sync replication is chosen for keeping backward
> compatibility. However some hackers argued to change this decision
> so that a quorum commit is chosen because they think that most users
> prefer to a quorum.
>
> (2)
> There will be still many source comments and documentations that
> we need to update, for example, in high-availability.sgml. We need to
> check and update them throughly.
Will try to update them.
> (3)
> The priority value is assigned to each standby listed in s_s_names
> even in quorum commit though those priority values are not used at all.
> Users can see those priority values in pg_stat_replication.
> Isn't this confusing? If yes, it might be better to always assign 1 as
> the priority, for example.
>
>
> Any other?
>
Do we need to consider the sorting method and the selecting k-th
latest LSN method?
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | amul sul | 2016-12-20 05:41:36 | Re: pg_background contrib module proposal |
Previous Message | Amit Langote | 2016-12-20 04:43:41 | Re: Declarative partitioning - another take |