Re: Synchronous Log Shipping Replication - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Simon Riggs
Subject Re: Synchronous Log Shipping Replication
Date
Msg-id 1220963957.3913.474.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Synchronous Log Shipping Replication  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Synchronous Log Shipping Replication
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 08:24 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Fujii Masao" <masao.fujii@gmail.com> writes:
> > On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 5:11 PM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> >> 
> >> Yes. We should have a LogwrtRqst pointer and LogwrtResult pointer for
> >> the send operation. The Write and Send operations can then continue
> >> independently of one another. XLogInsert() cannot advance to a new page
> >> while we are waiting to send or write.
> 
> > Agreed.
> 
> "Agreed"?  That last restriction is a deal-breaker.

OK, I should have said *if wal_buffers are full* XLogInsert() cannot
advance to a new page while we are waiting to send or write. So I don't
think its a deal breaker.

-- Simon Riggs           www.2ndQuadrant.comPostgreSQL Training, Services and Support



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Synchronous Log Shipping Replication
Next
From: "Brendan Jurd"
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] to_date() validation