Re: max_standby_delay considered harmful

From: "Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: max_standby_delay considered harmful
Date: 2010-05-03 19:41:01
Message-ID: 98262e6ddc08b92e913ed7bb559f60dc@biglumber.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

> Based on that, I don't know that there's really much user-seen behaviour
> between the two, except in 'oddball' situations, where there's a time
> skew between the servers, or a large lag, etc, in which case I think

Certainly that one particular case can be solved by making the
servers be in time sync a prereq for HS working (in the traditional way).
And by "prereq" I mean a "user beware" documentation warning.

- --
Greg Sabino Mullane greg(at)turnstep(dot)com
End Point Corporation http://www.endpoint.com/
PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 201005031539
http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iEYEAREDAAYFAkvfJr0ACgkQvJuQZxSWSsgSRwCgwAZpKJDqHX28y90rCx/CNXDt
JGgAoO9JeoBacvTJ09UJ+o1Nek3KtcYR
=gvch
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2010-05-03 19:46:32 Re: missing file in git repo
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-05-03 19:39:49 Re: max_standby_delay considered harmful