Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Efficient transaction-controlled synchronous replication.
| От | Robert Haas |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Efficient transaction-controlled synchronous replication. |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | AANLkTin3y0VzPADjNmXYWF5t_ou7ywqHARJhaxbQ=sTR@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Efficient transaction-controlled synchronous replication. ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Efficient
transaction-controlled synchronous replication.
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 5:24 PM, Kevin Grittner <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Since the current solution is intended to support data-loss-free >> failover, but NOT to guarantee a consistent view of the world from >> a SQL level, I doubt it's worth paying any price for this. > > Well, that brings us back to the question of why we would want to > suppress the view of the data on the master until the replica > acknowledges the commit. It *is* committed on the master, we're > just holding off on telling the committer about it until we can > honor the guarantee of replication. If it can be seen on the > replica before the committer get such acknowledgment, why not on the > master? Well, the idea is that we don't want to let people depend on the value until it's guaranteed to be durably committed. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: