Re: Synchronous replication - patch status inquiry
От | Heikki Linnakangas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Synchronous replication - patch status inquiry |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4C7F9555.2000008@enterprisedb.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Synchronous replication - patch status inquiry (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Synchronous replication - patch status inquiry
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 02/09/10 15:03, Simon Riggs wrote: > On Thu, 2010-09-02 at 19:24 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 7:23 PM, Heikki Linnakangas >> <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >>> That requirement falls out from the handling of disconnected standbys. If a >>> standby is not connected, what does the master do with commits? If the >>> answer is anything else than acknowledge them to the client immediately, as >>> if the standby never existed, the master needs to know what standby servers >>> exist. Otherwise it can't know if all the standbys are connected or not. >> >> Thanks. I understood why the registration is required. > > I don't. There is a simpler design that does not require registration. > > Please explain why we need registration, with an explanation that does > not presume it as a requirement. Please explain how you would implement "don't acknowledge commits until they're replicated to all standbys" without standby registration. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: