Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2

On 2015-07-02 PM 03:52, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 3:29 PM, Amit Langote
> <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
>> On 2015-07-02 PM 03:12, Fujii Masao wrote:
>>>
>>> So I'm thinking that we basically need to check the progress on each
>>> standby to choose new master.
>>>
>>
>> Does HA software determine a standby to promote based on replication progress
>> or would things be reliable enough for it to infer one from the quorum setting
>> specified in GUC (or wherever)? Is part of the job of this patch to make the
>> latter possible? Just wondering or perhaps I am completely missing the point.
> 
> Replication progress is a factor of choice, but not the only one. The
> sole role of this patch is just to allow us to have more advanced
> policy in defining how synchronous replication works, aka how we want
> to let the master acknowledge a commit synchronously from a set of N
> standbys. In any case, this is something unrelated to the discussion
> happening here.
> 

Got it, thanks!

Regards,
Amit