Re: Proposal: "Causal reads" mode for load balancing reads without stale data

On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 2:46 PM, Amit Langote
<Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2016/02/29 18:05, Thomas Munro wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 9:05 PM, Amit Langote wrote:
>>> +         servers.  A transaction that is run with
>>> <varname>causal_reads</> set
>>> +         to <literal>on</> is guaranteed either to see the effects of all
>>> +         completed transactions run on the primary with the setting on, or to
>>> +         receive an error "standby is not available for causal reads".
>>>
>>> "A transaction that is run" means "A transaction that is run on a
>>> standby", right?
>>
>> Well, it could be any server, standby or primary.  Of course standbys
>> are the interesting case since it it was already true that if you run
>> two sequential transactions run on the primary, the second can see the
>> effect of the first, but I like the idea of a general rule that
>> applies anywhere, allowing you not to care which server it is.
>
> I meant actually in context of that sentence only.

Ok, here's a new version that includes that change, fixes a conflict
with recent commit 10b48522 and removes an accidental duplicate copy
of the README file.

--
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com