On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 11:52:20AM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: > On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 3:42 PM, Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Here is the proposed detailed design: > > > > standbys.conf > > ============= > > # This is not initialized by initdb, so users need to create it under > > $PGDATA. > > * The template is located in the PREFIX/share directory. > > > > # This is read by postmaster at the startup as well as pg_hba.conf is. > > * In EXEC_BACKEND environement, each walsender must read it at the > > startup. > > * This is ignored when max_wal_senders is zero. > > * FATAL is emitted when standbys.conf doesn't exist even if > > max_wal_senders > > is positive. > > > > # SIGHUP makes only postmaser re-read the standbys.conf. > > * New configuration doesn't affect the existing connections to the > > standbys, > > i.e., it's used only for subsequent connections. > > * XXX: Should the existing connections react to new configuration? What > > if > > new standbys.conf doesn't have the standby_name of the existing > > connection? > > > > # The connection from the standby is rejected if its standby_name is not > > listed > > in standbys.conf. > > * Multiple standbys with the same name are allowed. > > > > # The valid values of SYNCHRONOUS field are async, recv, fsync and replay. > > > > standby_name > > ============ > > # This is new string-typed parameter in recovery.conf. > > * XXX: Should standby_name and standby_mode be merged? > > > > # Walreceiver sends this to the master when establishing the connection. > > The attached patch implements the above and simple synchronous replication > feature, which doesn't include quorum commit capability. The replication > mode (async, recv, fsync, replay) can be specified on a per-standby basis, > in standbys.conf. > > The patch still uses a poll loop in the backend, walsender, startup process > and walreceiver. If a latch feature Heikki proposed will have been committed, > I'll replace that with a latch.
Now that the latch patch is in, when do you think you'll be able to use it instead of the poll loop? Cheers, David. -- David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fet...@gmail.com iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
