On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > On 15.02.2011 18:42, Simon Riggs wrote: >> >> On Sat, 2011-02-12 at 14:11 -0800, Daniel Farina wrote: >>> >>> This is another bit of the syncrep patch split out. >>> >>> I will revisit the replication timeout one Real Soon, I promise -- but >>> I have a couple things to do today that may delay that until the >>> evening. >>> >>> >>> https://github.com/fdr/postgres/commit/ad3ce9ac62f0e128d7d1fd20d47184f867056af1 >>> >>> Context diff supplied here. >> >> Greg just tipped me off to this thread a few hours ago. I saw your other >> work on timeouts which looks good. >> >> I've reworked this feature myself, and its roughly the same thing you >> have posted, so I will just add on to this thread. The major change from >> my earlier patch is that the logic around setting xmin on the master is >> considerably tighter, and correctly uses locking. > > It would be wise to also transmit the epoch in addition to xmin, to avoid > confusion if the standby is > 2 billion transactions behind.
That case is probably hopelessly broken anyway. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
