Re: recovery_min_apply-delay and remote_apply

From: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de>
Cc: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: recovery_min_apply-delay and remote_apply
Date: 2016-09-16 21:55:06
Message-ID: CAEepm=29BEQiWCw7aPTX_TSneuVN3f3gg0cniW5w7C9C=7jjxg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 8:45 AM, Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de> wrote:
> Current PostgreSQL Documentation on recovery.conf has this about
> recovery_min_apply_delay[1]:
>
> ---<---
>
> This parameter is intended for use with streaming replication deployments;
> however, if the parameter is specified it will be honored in all cases.
> Synchronous replication is not affected by this setting because there is
> not yet any setting to request synchronous apply of transaction commits.
>
> --->---
>
> If i understand correctly, this is not true anymore with 9.6, where
> remote_apply will have exactly the behavior the paragraph above wants to
> contradict: any transaction executed with synchronous_commit=remote_apply
> will wait at least recovery_min_apply_delay to finish. Given that
> synchronous_commit can be controlled by any user, this might be dangerous
> if someone doesn't take care enough.

Yes, I missed that sentence. Thanks.

> I think we need a doc patch for that at least, see attached patch against
> master, but 9.6 should have a corrected one, too.

+1

--
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2016-09-16 23:07:43 Re: WIP: About CMake v2
Previous Message Andres Freund 2016-09-16 21:31:38 Re: Reminder: Call for Papers -- PGDay Austin 2016