| From: | Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Configuring synchronous replication |
| Date: | 2010-09-24 11:05:25 |
| Message-ID: | m2zkv7bdvu.fsf@hi-media.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I think maybe you missed Tom's point, or else you just didn't respond
> to it. If the master is wedged because it is waiting for a standby,
> then you cannot commit transactions on the master. Therefore you
> cannot update the system catalog which you must update to unwedge it.
> Failing over in that situation is potentially a huge nuisance and
> extremely undesirable.
All Wrong.
You might remember that Simon's proposal begins with per-transaction
synchronous replication behavior?
Regards,
--
dim
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2010-09-24 11:12:29 | Re: Configuring synchronous replication |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2010-09-24 10:59:42 | Re: Configuring synchronous replication |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2010-09-24 11:12:29 | Re: Configuring synchronous replication |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2010-09-24 10:59:42 | Re: Configuring synchronous replication |