From: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
---|---|
To: | artem(dot)gavrilov(at)percona(dot)com, pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Inaccurate statement about log shipping replication mode |
Date: | 2025-08-27 12:13:21 |
Message-ID: | a67687e233188a43a80b55c4ab8e1115bf2bd947.camel@cybertec.at |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs |
On Mon, 2025-08-25 at 09:58 +0200, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> On Thu, 2025-08-21 at 15:20 +0000, PG Doc comments form wrote:
> > Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/17/warm-standby.html
> >
> > The documentation page about Log-Shipping Standby Servers after describing
> > that there are file-based log shipping and record-based log shipping
> > (streaming replication) states: "It should be noted that log shipping is
> > asynchronous, i.e., the WAL records are shipped after transaction commit.".
> > This statement is misleading because the same page includes a section about
> > configuring synchronous streaming replication. To avoid confusion, I think
> > it makes sense to specify that record-based log shipping can be configured
> > as either asynchronous or synchronous.
>
> I think that the statement you quote is not only misleading, but wrong.
> WAL can get shipped before the transaction commits. Perhaps the sentence
> had better be
>
> It should be noted that by default, log shipping is asynchronous, i.e.,
> the primary server does not wait until the standby receives the data.
Here is a patch for that.
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v1-0001-Fix-doc-defining-asynchronous-replication.patch | text/x-patch | 1.5 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David G. Johnston | 2025-08-27 14:27:34 | Re: Ambiguity in VALUES synopsis: LIMIT vs FETCH |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2025-08-27 11:24:13 | Re: Small typo in doc |