On 10/4/2015 3:47 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
(Seems like you forgot to push the Reply-all button)
On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 7:01 PM, Madovsky wrote:
On 10/3/2015 3:30 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
and no reason is given to justify *why* this would be needed in your case
reason for a choice can be often an issue for other :D
I thought that postgresql 9.4 user could change on the fly with
synchronous_commit from local to on for ex
which hotstandby would become in sync and which in async to avoid a big
latency in case of let's say 100 hot standby.
it was an idea, a concept to let the master write and update the nodes, like
a queen bee ;)
but I'm afraid it's not possible, so maybe future version of pg will do it,
for now read from the master is my only solution.
Well, Thomas Munro (adding him in CC) has sent for integration with
9.6 a patch that would cover your need, by adding to
synchronous_commit a mode called 'apply', in which case a master would
wait for the transaction to be applied on standby before committing
locally:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAEepm=1fqkivL4V-OTPHwSgw4aF9HcoGiMrCW-yBtjipX9gsag@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Perhaps you could help with the review of the patch, this has stalled
a bit lately.
Regards,
Brilliant, however I'm not to caught everything in this thread.
I would love to contribute to this patch, but I have absolutely no
C/C++ experience (webdev languages only).
to tell simple, when SET LOCAL synchronous_commit TO ON is used on the fly
for the current transaction it would be great to have an other option to
choose
if this setting is for all standby or a specific one, leaving the other
async... gotcha? :)
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
