Re: Keepalive for max_standby_delay - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Keepalive for max_standby_delay
Date
Msg-id 26671.1275578286@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Keepalive for max_standby_delay  (Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>)
List pgsql-hackers
Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu> writes:
> On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 12:11 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> It is off-base. �The receiver does not "request" data, the sender is
>> what determines how much WAL is sent when.

> Hm, so what happens if the slave blocks, doesn't the sender block when
> the kernel buffers fill up?

Well, if the slave can't keep up, that's a separate problem.  It will
not fail to keep up as a result of the transmission mechanism.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Greg Stark
Date:
Subject: Re: Keepalive for max_standby_delay
Next
From: Jan Wieck
Date:
Subject: Re: Exposing the Xact commit order to the user