Re: max_standby_delay considered harmful - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: max_standby_delay considered harmful
Date
Msg-id AANLkTiljAwtVO2Q0WBWyyWORq3Y0GJedKYUb3LmjXMuk@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to max_standby_delay considered harmful  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: max_standby_delay considered harmful
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 11:37 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> I'm inclined to think that we should throw away all this logic and just
> have the slave cancel competing queries if the replay process waits
> more than max_standby_delay seconds to acquire a lock.  This is simple,
> understandable, and behaves the same whether we're reading live data or
> not.

Now that I've realized what the real problem is with max_standby_delay
(namely, that inactivity on the master can use up the delay), I think
we should do what Tom originally suggested here.  It's not as good as
a really working max_standby_delay, but we're not going to have that
for 9.0, and it's clearly better than a boolean.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_migrator to /contrib in a later 9.0 beta
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Adding xpath_exists function