On 14 April 2012 15:58, Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 4:16 AM, Thom Brown <t...@linux.com> wrote: >> I have a question though. What happens when this is set to "write" >> (or "remote_write" as proposed) but it's being used on a standalone >> primary? At the moment it's not documented what level of guarantee >> this would provide. > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/warm-standby.html#SYNCHRONOUS-REPLICATION-HA > ----------------- > Commits made when synchronous_commit is set to on or write will > wait until the synchronous standby responds. The response may > never occur if the last, or only, standby should crash. > ----------------- > > Is this description not enough? If not enough, how should we change > the document?
No, that's not what I was referring to. If you don't have a standby (i.e. a single, isolated database cluster with no replication), and its synchronous_commit is set to 'remote_write', what effect does that have? -- Thom -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
