| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Sync Rep Design |
| Date: | 2011-01-04 18:51:45 |
| Message-ID: | 1294167105.19612.8276.camel@ebony |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 2011-01-04 at 10:28 -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
> The relevant question is: which configuration(s) can we have ready for
> the next CommitFest and alpha release?
Based upon that series of conversations, I've reworked the design so
that there is (currently) only a single standby offering sync rep at any
one time. Other standbys can request to be sync standbys but they only
become the sync standby if the first one fails. Which was simple to do
and bridges the challenges of an exactly identified sync standby and the
fragility of too closely specifying the config.
I think you're right that trying to please everyone is not going to be
possible in this release, because of the explosion of parameter
combinations that require testing and because of the explosion in my
head that causes.
I'm not feeling well now, so I'm going to go to bed, not just to avoid
snapping at people. Even given that short interlude, I see no problem
about delivery.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/books/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2011-01-04 19:04:21 | Re: Sync Rep Design |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2011-01-04 18:50:12 | Re: system views for walsender activity |