Re: Patch: Implement failover on libpq connect level.
От | Catalin Iacob |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Patch: Implement failover on libpq connect level. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAHg_5gpzNZK6PYBf4mrSHt+ywgBV5wSR-2BNvVZRwSjgtYRfHw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Patch: Implement failover on libpq connect level. (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Patch: Implement failover on libpq connect level.
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 2:50 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > Hmm, let's go back to the JDBC method, then. "show > transaction_read_only" will return true on a standby, but presumably > also on any other non-writable node. You could even force it to be > true artificially if you wanted to force traffic off of a node, using > ALTER {SYSTEM|USER ...|DATABASE ..} SET default_transaction_read_only > = on > > I think that would address Alvaro's concern, and it's nicer anyway if > libpq and JDBC are doing the same thing. Not sure I agree that using this is a good idea in the first place. But if we end up using this, I really think the docs should be very explicit about what's implemented and not just say master/any. With the master/any docs in the patch I would be *very* surprised if a master is skipped only because it was configured with default_transaction_read_only = on.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: