Re: DRAFT 9.6 release

From: Bruce Momjian
Subject: Re: DRAFT 9.6 release
Date: ,
Msg-id: 20160830223254.GB31355@momjian.us
(view: Whole thread, Raw)
In response to: Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Josh Berkus)
Responses: Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Michael Paquier)
List: pgsql-advocacy

Tree view

DRAFT 9.6 release  (Josh Berkus, )
 Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Amit Langote, )
 Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Josh Berkus, )
  Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Bruce Momjian, )
 Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Josh Berkus, )
  Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Bruce Momjian, )
   Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Michael Paquier, )
 Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Josh Berkus, )
  Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Michael Paquier, )
  Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Amit Langote, )
 Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Josh Berkus, )
 Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Josh Berkus, )
  Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Amit Langote, )
 Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Josh Berkus, )
  Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Michael Paquier, )
  Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Amit Langote, )
 Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Josh Berkus, )
  Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Michael Paquier, )
  Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Josh Berkus, )
   Re: DRAFT 9.6 release -- is Final  (Josh Berkus, )
    Re: DRAFT 9.6 release -- is Final  (Simon Riggs, )
     Re: DRAFT 9.6 release -- is Final  (Simon Riggs, )
  Re: DRAFT 9.6 release -- is Final  (Josh Berkus, )
   Re: DRAFT 9.6 release -- is Final  (Stefan Kaltenbrunner, )
    Re: DRAFT 9.6 release -- is Final  (Simon Riggs, )
  Re: DRAFT 9.6 release -- is Final  (Josh Berkus, )
  Re: DRAFT 9.6 release -- is Final  (Josh Berkus, )
  Re: DRAFT 9.6 release -- new wording  (Josh Berkus, )
   Re: DRAFT 9.6 release -- new wording  (Justin Clift, )
    Re: DRAFT 9.6 release -- new wording  (Justin Clift, )
    Re: DRAFT 9.6 release -- new wording  (Robert Haas, )
   Re: DRAFT 9.6 release -- new wording  (Mike Toews, )
   Re: DRAFT 9.6 release -- new wording  (Masahiko Sawada, )
   Re: DRAFT 9.6 release -- new wording  (Josh Berkus, )
    Re: [MASSMAIL]Re: DRAFT 9.6 release -- new wording  ("Gilberto Castillo", )
   Re: DRAFT 9.6 release -- new wording  (Josh Berkus, )
    Re: DRAFT 9.6 release -- new wording  (Michael Banck, )
   Re: DRAFT 9.6 release -- new wording  (Josh Berkus, )
   Re: DRAFT 9.6 release -- new wording  (Josh Berkus, )
 Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Josh Berkus, )
  Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Michael Paquier, )
 Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Josh Berkus, )
  Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Michael Paquier, )
   Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Amit Langote, )
 Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Josh Berkus, )
  Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  ("Nicholson, Brad (Toronto, ON, CA)", )
   Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Michael Paquier, )
  Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Robert Haas, )
   Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Bruce Momjian, )
    Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Robert Haas, )
 Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Josh Berkus, )
  Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Michael Paquier, )

On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 03:22:18PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> So that's usually what I mean when I say quorum commit.  But apparently
> our feature does something slightly different?
>
> "For example, a setting of 3 (s1, s2, s3, s4) makes transaction commits
> wait until their WAL records are received by three higher-priority
> standbys chosen from standby servers s1, s2, s3 and s4"
>
> What does that mean exactly?  If I do:
>
> 3 ( s1, s2, s3, s4, s5 )
>
> And a commit is ack'd by s2, s3, and s5, what happens?

As I understand it, it can continue with those three servers sending a
confirmation back.

--
  Bruce Momjian  <>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+                     Ancient Roman grave inscription +



pgsql-advocacy by date:

From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: DRAFT 9.6 release
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: DRAFT 9.6 release