| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Erik Rijkers <er(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, Steve Singer <steve(at)ssinger(dot)info>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Logical Replication WIP |
| Date: | 2017-01-06 20:26:41 |
| Message-ID: | bfec23ec-108b-83d2-b60e-7271b5375318@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
0005-Add-separate-synchronous-commit-control-for-logical--v16.patch.gz
This looks a little bit hackish. I'm not sure how this would behave
properly when either synchronous_commit or
logical_replication_synchronous_commit is changed at run time with a reload.
I'm thinking maybe this and perhaps some other WAL receiver settings
should be properties of a subscription, like ALTER SUBSCRIPTION ...
SET/RESET.
Actually, maybe I'm a bit confused what this is supposed to achieve.
synchronous_commit has both a local and a remote meaning. What behavior
are the various combinations of physical and logical replication
supposed to accomplish?
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-01-06 20:45:11 | Re: Add support for SRF and returning composites to pl/tcl |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-01-06 20:18:04 | Re: Logical Replication WIP |