Re: Standalone synchronous master
От | Josh Berkus |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Standalone synchronous master |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 52E2DB49.50100@agliodbs.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Standalone synchronous master (Hannu Krosing <hannu@2ndQuadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Standalone synchronous master
Re: Standalone synchronous master Re: Standalone synchronous master |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 01/24/2014 12:47 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > ISTM the consensus is that we need better monitoring/administration > interfaces so that people can script the behavior they want in external > tools. Also, a new synchronous apply replication mode would be handy, > but that'd be a whole different patch. We don't have a patch on the > table that we could consider committing any time soon, so I'm going to > mark this as rejected in the commitfest app. I don't feel that "we'll never do auto-degrade" is determinative; several hackers were for auto-degrade, and they have a good use-case argument. However, we do have consensus that we need more scaffolding than this patch supplies in order to make auto-degrade *safe*. I encourage the submitter to resumbit and improved version of this patch (one with more monitorability) for 9.5 CF1. That'll give us a whole dev cycle to argue about it. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://pgexperts.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: