Re: Issues with Quorum Commit
От | Dimitri Fontaine |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Issues with Quorum Commit |
Дата | |
Msg-id | m2tykyjg22.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Issues with Quorum Commit (Markus Wanner <markus@bluegap.ch>) |
Ответы |
Re: Issues with Quorum Commit
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Markus Wanner <markus@bluegap.ch> writes: > Why does one ever want the guarantee that sync replication gives to only > hold true up to one failure, if a better guarantee doesn't cost anything > extra? (Note that a "good alerting system" is impossible to achieve with > only two servers. You need a third device anyway). I think you're all into durability, and that's good. The extra cost is service downtime if that's not what you're after: there's also availability and load balancing read queries on a system with no lag (no stale data servicing) when all is working right. I still think your use case is a solid one, but that we need to be ready to answer to some other ones, that you call relaxed and wrong because of data loss risks. My proposal is to make the risk window obvious and the behavior when you enter it configurable. Regards, -- Dimitri Fontaine http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: