Re: Synchronous replication - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Dimitri Fontaine
Subject Re: Synchronous replication
Date
Msg-id E3662D1B-98F0-4CA4-A23B-5DE4AF2221E7@hi-media.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Synchronous replication  (Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: Synchronous replication
List pgsql-hackers
Le 16 juil. 2010 à 12:43, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> a écrit :

On 16/07/10 10:40, Fujii Masao wrote:
So we should always prevent the standby from applying any WAL in pg_xlog
unless walreceiver is in progress. That is, if there is no WAL available
in the archive, the standby ignores pg_xlog and starts walreceiver
process to request for WAL streaming.

That completely defeats the purpose of storing streamed WAL in pg_xlog in the first place. The reason it's written and fsync'd to pg_xlog is that if the standby subsequently crashes, you can use the WAL from pg_xlog to reapply the WAL up to minRecoveryPoint. Otherwise you can't start up the standby anymore.

I guess we know for sure that this point has been fsync()ed on the Master, or that we could arrange it so that we know that?

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Chris Browne
Date:
Subject: Re: SHOW TABLES
Next
From: "Kevin Grittner"
Date:
Subject: Re: SHOW TABLES