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

From Dimitri Fontaine
Subject Re: Synchronous Log Shipping Replication
Date
Msg-id 200809091501.11484.dfontaine@hi-media.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Synchronous Log Shipping Replication  (Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: Synchronous Log Shipping Replication  (Markus Wanner <markus@bluegap.ch>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

Le mardi 09 septembre 2008, Heikki Linnakangas a écrit :
> The tricky part is, how does A know if it should wait, and for how long?
> commit_delay sure isn't ideal, but AFAICS the log shipping proposal
> doesn't provide any solution to that.

It might just be I'm not understanding what it's all about, but it seems to me
with WALSender process A will wait, whatever happens, either until the WAL is
sent to slave or written to disk on the slave.

I naively read Simon's proposition to consider GroupCommit done with this new
feature. A is already waiting (for some external event to complete), why
can't we use this for including some other transactions commits into the
local deal?

Regards,
--
dim

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Synchronous Log Shipping Replication
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: [gsmith@gregsmith.com: Re: [patch] GUC source file and line number]