Re: Sync Rep: First Thoughts on Code - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Simon Riggs
Subject Re: Sync Rep: First Thoughts on Code
Date
Msg-id 1228314780.20796.475.camel@hp_dx2400_1
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Sync Rep: First Thoughts on Code  ("Fujii Masao" <masao.fujii@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Sync Rep: First Thoughts on Code  ("Fujii Masao" <masao.fujii@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, 2008-12-03 at 21:37 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:

> Since I thought that the figure was more intelligible for some people
> than my poor English, I illustrated the architecture first.
> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/NTT%27s_Development_Projects#Detailed_Design
> 
> Are there any other parts which should be illustrated for review?

Those are very useful, thanks.

Some questions to check my understanding (expected answers in brackets)

* Diagram on p.2 has two Archives. We have just one (yes)

* We send data continuously, whether or not we are in sync/async? (yes)
So the only difference between sync/async is whether we wait when we
flush the commit? (yes)

* If we have synchronous_commit = off do we ignore
synchronous_replication = on (yes)

* If two transactions commit almost simultaneously and one is sync and
the other async then only the sync backend will wait? (Yes)


Do we definitely need the archiver to move the files written by
walreceiver to archive and then move them back out again? Seems like we
can streamline that part in many (all?) cases.

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



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: tuplestore potential performance problem
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] GIN improvements