Re: Standalone synchronous master - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: Standalone synchronous master
Date
Msg-id 20140110224740.GC13568@awork2.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Standalone synchronous master  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
Responses Re: Standalone synchronous master  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2014-01-10 14:44:28 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> 
> On 01/10/2014 02:33 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> >
> >On 2014-01-10 14:29:58 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> >>db02 goes down. It doesn't matter why. It is down. db01 continues to accept
> >>orders, allow people to log into the website and we can still service
> >>accounts. The continuity of service continues.
> >
> >Why is that configuration advantageous over a async configuration is the
> >question. Why, with those requirements, are you using a synchronous
> >standby at all?
> 
> If the master goes down, I can fail over knowing that as many of my
> transactions as possible have been replicated.

It's not like async replication mode delays sending data to the standby
in any way.

Really, the commits themselves are sent to the server at exactly the
same speed independent of sync/async. The only thing that's delayed is
the *notificiation* of the client that sent the commit. Not the commit
itself.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

-- Andres Freund                       http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jeff Janes
Date:
Subject: Re: Standalone synchronous master
Next
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: Standalone synchronous master