Greg Stark <gsst...@mit.edu> writes: >> Well, if the slave can't keep up, that's a separate problem. It will >> not fail to keep up as a result of the transmission mechanism.
> No, I mean if the slave is paused due to a conflict. Does it stop > reading data from the master or does it buffer it up on disk? If it > stops reading it from the master then the effect is the same as if the > slave stopped "requesting" data even if there's no actual request. The data keeps coming in and getting dumped into the slave's pg_xlog. walsender/walreceiver are not at all tied to the slave's application of WAL. In principle we could have the code around max_standby_delay notice just how far behind it's gotten and adjust the delay tolerance based on that; but I think designing a feedback loop for that is 9.1 material. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers