From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: New sync commit mode remote_write |
Date: | 2012-04-19 09:47:36 |
Message-ID: | CE5AA771-CA69-4CBB-96F4-6AE560F1EEB3@gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Apr 19, 2012, at 5:05 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
> I admit to not having followed the discussion around the new mode for
> synchronous_commit very closely, so my apologies if this has been
> discussed and dismiseed - I blame failing to find it int he archives
> ;)
>
> My understanding from looking at the docs is that
> synchronous_commit=remote_write will always imply a *local* commit as
> well.
>
> Is there any way to set the system up to do a write to the remote,
> ensure it's in memory of the remote (remote_write mode, not full sync
> to disk), but *not* necessarily to the local disk? Meaning we're ok to
> release the transaction when the data is in memory both locally and
> remotely but not wait for I/O?
If we crash, the slave can end up ahead of the master, and then it's hopelessly corrupted...
Maybe we could engineer around this, but it hasn't been done yet.
...Robert
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2012-04-19 10:40:54 | Re: New sync commit mode remote_write |
Previous Message | Sandro Santilli | 2012-04-19 09:21:11 | Re: Gsoc2012 idea, tablesample |