Uh, we have three days before we package 9.0beta2. It would be good if we could decide on the max_standby_delay issue soon.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- Simon Riggs wrote: > On Wed, 2010-05-26 at 16:22 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > > > Just this second posted about that, as it turns out. > > > > > > I have a v3 *almost* ready of the keepalive patch. It still makes sense > > > to me after a few days reflection, so is worth discussion and review. In > > > or out, I want this settled within a week. Definitely need some R&R > > > here. > > > > Does the keepalive fix all the issues with max_standby_delay? Tom? > > OK, here's v4. > > Summary > > * WALSender adds a timestamp onto the header of every WAL chunk sent. > > * Each WAL record now has a conceptual "send timestamp" that remains > constant while that record is replayed. This is used as the basis from > which max_standby_delay is calculated when required during replay. > > * Send timestamp is calculated as the later of the timestamp of chunk in > which WAL record was sent and the latest XLog time. > > * WALSender sends an empty message as a keepalive when nothing else to > send. (No longer a special message type for the keepalive). > > I think its close, but if there's a gaping hole here somewhere then I'll > punt for this release. > > -- > Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com [ Attachment, skipping... ] > > -- > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + None of us is going to be here forever. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
