| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Issues with Quorum Commit |
| Date: | 2010-10-07 17:48:21 |
| Message-ID: | 4CAE07E5.6090403@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> If you want "synchronous replication" because you want "query
> availabilty" while making sure you're not getting "stale" queries from
> all your slaves, than using your k < N (k = 3 and N - 10) situation is
> screwing your self.
Correct. If that is your reason for synch standby, then you should be
using k = N configuration.
However, some people are willing to sacrifice consistency for durability
and availability. We should give them that option (eventually), since
among that triad you can never have more than two.
--
-- Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://www.pgexperts.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Markus Wanner | 2010-10-07 17:50:40 | Re: Issues with Quorum Commit |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2010-10-07 17:45:29 | Re: standby registration (was: is sync rep stalled?) |