On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 5:10 PM, Yeb Havinga <yebhavinga@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2011-03-02 21:26, Kevin Grittner wrote:
>>
>> I think including "synchronous" is OK as long as it's properly
>> qualified. Off-hand thoughts in no particular order:
>>
>> semi-synchronous
>> conditionally synchronous
>> synchronous with automatic failover to standalone
>
> It would be good to name the concept equal to how other DBMSses call it, if
> they have a similar concept - don't know if Mysql's semisynchronous
> replication is the same, but after a quick read it sounds like it does.
Here's the link:
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.5/en/replication-semisync.html
I think this is mostly about how many slaves have to ack the commit.
It's not entirely clear to me what happens if a slave is set up but
not connected at the moment.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
