| From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ants Aasma <ants(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
| Cc: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>, robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com, simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, hannu(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, fred(at)nti(dot)ufop(dot)br, michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Parallell Optimizer |
| Date: | 2013-06-13 01:18:11 |
| Message-ID: | 20130613011811.GG7200@tamriel.snowman.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
* Ants Aasma (ants(at)cybertec(dot)at) wrote:
> In a cluster setting you take the CSN value on the master, then before
> starting execution on a standby you wait until that the standby has
> replayed enough WAL to reach the CSN point read from the master and
> you know that after that everything that the snapshot can see is also
> replayed on the standby.
This does make a lot of sense- but to clarify, this would only be for
certain isolation levels, right? Or would we implement this for every
snapshot taken in a read-committed transaction?
Thanks,
Stephen
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ants Aasma | 2013-06-13 01:48:14 | Re: Parallell Optimizer |
| Previous Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2013-06-13 01:09:25 | Re: Parallell Optimizer |