Re: Standby catch up state change - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Pavan Deolasee
Subject Re: Standby catch up state change
Date
Msg-id CABOikdPAmuYZmJbvQ=H0aEiFAS5rV7ZL1Vx9Pd-aooN4=wWqRw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Standby catch up state change  (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Standby catch up state change  (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 3:59 PM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:

I don't think that'd be a good idea - the "caughtup" logic is used to
determine whether we need to wait for further wal to be generated
locally if we haven't got anything else to do. And we only need to do so
when we reached the end of the WAL.


Obviously I do not understand the logic caughtup fully, but don't you think the log message about standby having caught up with master while it hasn't because the sender has buffered a lot of data, is wrong ? Or are you saying those are two different things really ?
 
Also, we'd have to reset caughtup everytime we send data (in
XLogSend()), that'd be horrible.


Sorry, I did not get that. I was only arguing that the log message about standby having caught up with master should be delayed until standby has actually received the WAL, not much about the actual implementation.

Thanks,
Pavan 

--
Pavan Deolasee
http://www.linkedin.com/in/pavandeolasee

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Standby catch up state change
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Standby catch up state change