On Mon, 2011-02-14 at 14:13 -0800, Daniel Farina wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 12:48 AM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Daniel Farina <daniel@heroku.com> wrote:
> >> Context diff equivalent attached.
> >
> > Thanks for the patch!
> >
> > As I said before, the timeout which this patch provides doesn't work well
> > when the walsender gets blocked in sending WAL. At first, we would
> > need to implement a non-blocking write function as an infrastructure
> > of the replication timeout, I think.
> > http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/AANLkTi%3DPu2ne%3DVO-%2BCLMXLQh9y85qumLCbBP15CjnyUS%40mail.gmail.com
I wasn't aware that had been raised before. Thanks for noting it again.
I guess that's why you thought "wait forever" was a good idea ;-)
> Interesting point...if that's accepted as required-for-commit, what
> are the perceptions of the odds that, presuming I can write the code
> quickly enough, that there's enough infrastructure/ports already in
> postgres to allow for a non-blocking write on all our supported
> platforms?
I'd like to see what you come up with. I would rate that as important,
though not essential for sync replication.
-- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/books/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services
