| From: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com, Josh Berkus <josh(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Sync Rep Design |
| Date: | 2011-01-01 16:28:42 |
| Message-ID: | m2ei8wy4ed.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> writes:
> well you keep saying that but to be honest I cannot really even see a
> usecase for me - what is "only a random one of a set of servers is sync at
> any time and I don't really know which one".
It looks easy enough to get to know which one it is. Surely the primary
knows and could update something visible through a system view for
users? This as been asked for before and I was thinking there was a
consensus on this.
Regards,
--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2011-01-01 16:35:59 | Re: Sync Rep Design |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-01-01 16:06:57 | ALTER TABLE .. SET SCHEMA lock strength |