On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 2:37 AM, Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@gmail.com> wrote: > Umm... what is your definition of "synchronous"? I'm planning to provide > four synchronization modes as follows, for v8.5. Does this fit in your
I think my definition would be that a query against the replica will produce the same result as a query against the master -- and that that will be the case even after a system failure. That might not necessarily mean that the log entry is fsynced on the replica, only that it's fsynced in a location where the replica will have access to it when it runs recovery. I do have a different question though. What do you plan to do if there's a failure when they're out of sync? The master hasn't responded to the commit yet because it's still waiting on the replica to respond but it has already recorded the commit itself. When it comes back up it's out of sync with the replica and has to resend those records? What if the replica has already received it and it was the confirmation which was lost? -- greg -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
