On 2015-07-02 PM 03:52, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 3:29 PM, Amit Langote > <langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote: >> On 2015-07-02 PM 03:12, Fujii Masao wrote: >>> >>> So I'm thinking that we basically need to check the progress on each >>> standby to choose new master. >>> >> >> Does HA software determine a standby to promote based on replication progress >> or would things be reliable enough for it to infer one from the quorum >> setting >> specified in GUC (or wherever)? Is part of the job of this patch to make the >> latter possible? Just wondering or perhaps I am completely missing the point. > > Replication progress is a factor of choice, but not the only one. The > sole role of this patch is just to allow us to have more advanced > policy in defining how synchronous replication works, aka how we want > to let the master acknowledge a commit synchronously from a set of N > standbys. In any case, this is something unrelated to the discussion > happening here. >
Got it, thanks! Regards, Amit -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
