Re: Issues with Quorum Commit

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Issues with Quorum Commit
Date: 2010-10-07 17:59:06
Message-ID: 4CAE0A6A.9070301@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> But as a practical matter, I'm afraid the true cost of the better
> guarantee you're suggesting here is additional code complexity that will
> likely cause this feature to miss 9.1 altogether. As far as I'm
> concerned, this whole diversion into the topic of quorum commit is only
> consuming resources away from targeting something achievable in the time
> frame of a single release.

Yes. My purpose in starting this thread was to show that k > 1 "quorum
commit" is considerably more complex than the people who have been
bringing it up in other threads seem to think it is. It is not
achievable for 9.1, and maybe not even for 9.2.

--
-- Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://www.pgexperts.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Aidan Van Dyk 2010-10-07 17:59:23 Re: standby registration (was: is sync rep stalled?)
Previous Message Robert Haas 2010-10-07 17:57:23 Re: standby registration (was: is sync rep stalled?)