Re: Synchronous replication and read consistency - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Thomas Kellerer
Subject Re: Synchronous replication and read consistency
Date
Msg-id mpbi9e$s4p$1@ger.gmane.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Synchronous replication and read consistency  (Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@ymail.com>)
List pgsql-general
Kevin Grittner schrieb am 29.07.2015 um 23:10:
> No, it means that if the primary is hit by a meteor and you promote
> the standby, the data will not have been lost.  The time between
> the successful return of the commit on the primary and the time at
> which the change becomes visible on the standby is normally quite
> small; you may have trouble running into a case where you notice
> it, but it can happen.

It's actually not that hard to run into. We encountered this when we were running
unit tests against a master/slave setup with pgPool:


http://postgresql.nabble.com/Synchronous-replication-pgPool-not-all-transactions-immediately-visible-on-standby-tp5820275.html

Regards
Thomas




pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: "Joshua D. Drake"
Date:
Subject: Re: Synchronous replication and read consistency
Next
From: Melvin Davidson
Date:
Subject: Re: instr detail