Re: An attempt to avoid locally-committed-but-not-replicated-to-standby-transactions in synchronous replication
От | SATYANARAYANA NARLAPURAM |
---|---|
Тема | Re: An attempt to avoid locally-committed-but-not-replicated-to-standby-transactions in synchronous replication |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAHg+QDcw6er6maVHq5PGR2t7NePXMWD9Vih9TRE=8Z=LDxOE9w@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: An attempt to avoid locally-committed-but-not-replicated-to-standby-transactions in synchronous replication (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: An attempt to avoid locally-committed-but-not-replicated-to-standby-transactions in synchronous replication
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 8:29 AM Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 08:14:10AM -0800, SATYANARAYANA NARLAPURAM wrote:
> 2. Process proc die immediately when a backend is waiting for sync
> replication acknowledgement, as it does today, however, upon restart,
> don't open up for business (don't accept ready-only connections)
> unless the sync standbys have caught up.
>
>
> Are you planning to block connections or queries to the database? It would be
> good to allow connections and let them query the monitoring views but block the
> queries until sync standby have caught up. Otherwise, this leaves a monitoring
> hole. In cloud, I presume superusers are allowed to connect and monitor (end
> customers are not the role members and can't query the data). The same can't be
> true for all the installations. Could you please add more details on your
> approach?
I think ALTER SYSTEM should be allowed, particularly so you can modify
synchronous_standby_names, no?
Yes, Change in synchronous_standby_names is expected in this situation. IMHO, blocking all the connections is not a recommended approach.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
Embrace your flaws. They make you human, rather than perfect,
which you will never be.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: