Re: Standalone synchronous master
Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@gmail.com>
From: Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@gmail.com>
To: Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>,
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>,
Hannu Krosing <hannu@2ndquadrant.com>, MauMau <maumau307@gmail.com>,
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@ymail.com>,
Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com>,
Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>,
Rajeev rastogi <rajeev.rastogi@huawei.com>,
pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2014-01-10T22:41:18Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 01/10/2014 02:33 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2014-01-10 14:29:58 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote: >> db02 goes down. It doesn't matter why. It is down. db01 continues to accept >> orders, allow people to log into the website and we can still service >> accounts. The continuity of service continues. > > Why is that configuration advantageous over a async configuration is the > question. Why, with those requirements, are you using a synchronous > standby at all? +1 > > Greetings, > > Andres Freund > -- Adrian Klaver adrian.klaver@gmail.com