Re: Standalone synchronous master
От | Josh Berkus |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Standalone synchronous master |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 52CDDE32.1050104@agliodbs.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Standalone synchronous master (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 01/08/2014 03:18 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: > Do you really feel that a WARNING and increasing the docs to point > out that three systems are necessary, particularly under the 'high > availability' documentation and options, is a bad idea? I fail to see > how that does anything but clarify the use-case for our users. I think the warning is dumb, and that the suggested documentation change is insufficient. If we're going to clarify things, then we need to have a full-on several-page doc showing several examples of different sync rep configurations and explaining their tradeoffs (including the different sync modes and per-transaction sync). Anything short of that is just going to muddy the waters further. Mind you, someone needs to take a machete to the HA section of the docs anyway. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://pgexperts.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: