Re: Request for further clarification on synchronous_commit

2020-10-17 Thread Kasper Kondzielski
That's awesome, thanks! czw., 15 paź 2020 o 21:16 Bruce Momjian napisał(a): > On Tue, Oct 6, 2020 at 07:38:48PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 04:15:39PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > How is this for a table? > > > > > > -- local -- -

Re: Request for further clarification on synchronous_commit

2020-10-15 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Tue, Oct 6, 2020 at 07:38:48PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 04:15:39PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > How is this for a table? > > > > -- local -- --- standbys > > -- > >durable query

Re: Request for further clarification on synchronous_commit

2020-10-06 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 04:15:39PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > How is this for a table? > > -- local -- --- standbys > -- > durable query durable commit durable > commit > commit

Re: Request for further clarification on synchronous_commit

2020-08-21 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 11:39:53AM +0200, Kasper Kondzielski wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 12:50:34PM +0200, Kasper Kondzielski wrote: > > > Hi, thanks for the reply. > > > > > > To be honest I don't think it is better. Previously paragraph about > > > remote_apply was after paragraph about `o

Re: Request for further clarification on synchronous_commit

2020-08-19 Thread Kasper Kondzielski
> On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 12:50:34PM +0200, Kasper Kondzielski wrote: > > Hi, thanks for the reply. > > > > To be honest I don't think it is better. Previously paragraph about > > remote_apply was after paragraph about `on` and before remote_write which > > followed natural order in terms of how st

Re: Request for further clarification on synchronous_commit

2020-08-18 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 10:58:51AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Un, 'on' does _not_ apply the WAL data, and remote_apply does do remote > fsync. If you want to go in order of severity, with the most severe > first, it is: > > remote_apply > on > remote_write > local > >

Re: Request for further clarification on synchronous_commit

2020-08-18 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 12:50:34PM +0200, Kasper Kondzielski wrote: > Hi, thanks for the reply. > > To be honest I don't think it is better. Previously paragraph about > remote_apply was after paragraph about `on` and before remote_write which > followed natural order in terms of how strict these

Re: Request for further clarification on synchronous_commit

2020-08-18 Thread Kasper Kondzielski
Hi, thanks for the reply. To be honest I don't think it is better. Previously paragraph about remote_apply was after paragraph about `on` and before remote_write which followed natural order in terms of how strict these parameters are (i.e. how strong are the guarantees they provide). Because of t

Re: Request for further clarification on synchronous_commit

2020-08-17 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 01:32:35PM +, PG Doc comments form wrote: > The following documentation comment has been logged on the website: > > Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/12/runtime-config-wal.html > Description: > > Hello, > > First of all I would like to say that PostgreSQL has the

Request for further clarification on synchronous_commit

2020-08-14 Thread PG Doc comments form
The following documentation comment has been logged on the website: Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/12/runtime-config-wal.html Description: Hello, First of all I would like to say that PostgreSQL has the best documentation I've ever seen. It is very clear and comprehensive. That's the main