On Sat, 2010-09-18 at 14:42 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> > * Per-transaction control. Some transactions are important, others are not.
>
> Low priority.
> I see this as a 9.2 feature. Nobody I know is asking for it yet, and I
> think we need to get the other stuff right first.
I understand completely why anybody that has never used sync replication
would think per-transaction control is a small deal. I fully expect your
clients to try sync rep and then 5 minutes later say "Oh Crap, this sync
rep is so slow it's unusable. Isn't there a way to tune it?".
I've designed a way to tune sync rep so it is usable and useful. And
putting that feature into 9.1 costs very little, if anything. My patch
to do this is actually smaller than any other attempt to implement this
and I claim faster too. You don't need to use the per-transaction
controls, but they'll be there if you need them.
-- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.comPostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services
