Horton

Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Efficient transaction-controlled synchronous replication.

Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>

View thread
From: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>
To: Kevin Grittner <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Markus Wanner <markus@bluegap.ch>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>, MARK CALLAGHAN <mdcallag@gmail.com>, Aidan Van Dyk <aidan@highrise.ca>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2011-03-18T21:30:04Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Efficient transaction-controlled synchronous replication.

On Fri, 2011-03-18 at 16:24 -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>  
> > Since the current solution is intended to support data-loss-free
> > failover, but NOT to guarantee a consistent view of the world from
> > a SQL level, I doubt it's worth paying any price for this.
>  
> Well, that brings us back to the question of why we would want to
> suppress the view of the data on the master until the replica
> acknowledges the commit.  It *is* committed on the master, we're
> just holding off on telling the committer about it until we can
> honor the guarantee of replication.  If it can be seen on the
> replica before the committer get such acknowledgment, why not on the
> master?

I think the issue is explicit acknowledgement, not visibility.

-- 
 Simon Riggs           http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/books/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services