Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-08-29 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 3:11 AM, Josh Berkus wrote: >> On 08/22/2017 11:04 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: >>> WARNING: what you did is ok, but you might have wanted to do something else >>> >>> First

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-08-24 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 3:11 AM, Josh Berkus wrote: > On 08/22/2017 11:04 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: >> WARNING: what you did is ok, but you might have wanted to do something else >> >> First of all, whether or not that can properly be called a warning is >> highly debatable.

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-08-23 Thread Josh Berkus
On 08/22/2017 11:04 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > WARNING: what you did is ok, but you might have wanted to do something else > > First of all, whether or not that can properly be called a warning is > highly debatable. Also, if you do that sort of thing to your spouse > and/or children, they

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-08-23 Thread Michael Paquier
On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 3:04 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > It seems to me that we should discuss whether we want to keep the some > syntax such as 'a,b', 'N(a,b)' before thinking whether or not that > making the quorum commit the default behavior of 'N(a,b)' syntax. If > we

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-08-23 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Sat, Aug 19, 2017 at 12:28 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 1:13 AM, Michael Paquier > wrote: >> I had in mind a ereport(WARNING) in create_syncrep_config. Extra >> thoughts/opinions welcome. > > I think for v10 we should just

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-08-18 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 1:13 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > I had in mind a ereport(WARNING) in create_syncrep_config. Extra > thoughts/opinions welcome. I think for v10 we should just document the behavior we've got; I think it's too late to be whacking things around

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-08-16 Thread Michael Paquier
On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 2:08 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Michael Paquier > wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 4:24 PM, Masahiko Sawada >> wrote: >>> FWIW, in my opinion if tte current

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-08-16 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 4:24 PM, Masahiko Sawada > wrote: >> FWIW, in my opinion if tte current behavior of 'N(a,b)' could confuse >> users and we want to break the backward

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-08-16 Thread Michael Paquier
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 4:24 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > FWIW, in my opinion if tte current behavior of 'N(a,b)' could confuse > users and we want to break the backward compatibility, I'd rather like > to remove that style in PostgreSQL 10 and to raise an syntax error to >

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-08-16 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 1:40 AM, Josh Berkus wrote: > On 08/09/2017 10:49 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 8:19 AM, Masahiko Sawada >> wrote: >>> On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 2:24 PM, Noah Misch wrote: This item

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-08-10 Thread Josh Berkus
On 08/09/2017 10:49 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 8:19 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: >> On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 2:24 PM, Noah Misch wrote: >>> This item appears under "decisions to recheck mid-beta". If anyone is going >>> to push for

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-08-09 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 8:19 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 2:24 PM, Noah Misch wrote: >> This item appears under "decisions to recheck mid-beta". If anyone is going >> to push for a change here, now is the time. > > It has been 1

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-08-04 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 2:24 PM, Noah Misch wrote: > On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 08:55:37AM +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote: >> On 06/04/17 03:51, Noah Misch wrote: >> > On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 12:48:56AM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: >> >> On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:45 PM, Noah Misch

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-07-27 Thread Noah Misch
On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 08:55:37AM +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote: > On 06/04/17 03:51, Noah Misch wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 12:48:56AM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: > >> On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:45 PM, Noah Misch wrote: > >>> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 09:49:58PM +0900, Fujii

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-26 Thread Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
At Tue, 25 Apr 2017 21:21:29 +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote in > On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 8:07 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 2:09 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI > >

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-25 Thread Fujii Masao
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 5:41 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > At Tue, 25 Apr 2017 09:22:59 +0900, Masahiko Sawada > wrote in >> >> Please observe the policy on open item

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-25 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 8:07 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 2:09 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI > wrote: >> >> I'm not good at composition, so I cannot insist on my >> proposal. For the convenience of others, here is the proposal

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-25 Thread Amit Kapila
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 2:09 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > > I'm not good at composition, so I cannot insist on my > proposal. For the convenience of others, here is the proposal > from Fujii-san. > Do you see any problem with the below proposal? To me, this

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-25 Thread Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
At Tue, 25 Apr 2017 09:22:59 +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote in > >> Please observe the policy on open item ownership[1] and send a status > >> update > >> within three calendar days of this message.

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-25 Thread Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
At Tue, 25 Apr 2017 01:13:12 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote in > On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 2:55 PM, Masahiko Sawada > wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 9:31 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI > >

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-24 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 12:56 AM, Fujii Masao wrote: > On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 9:02 AM, Noah Misch wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 11:34:34PM -0700, Noah Misch wrote: >>> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 01:20:05PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote: >>> > On Fri,

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-24 Thread Fujii Masao
On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 2:55 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 9:31 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI > wrote: >> Ok, I got the point. >> >> At Wed, 19 Apr 2017 17:39:01 +0900 (Tokyo Standard Time), Kyotaro HORIGUCHI >>

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-24 Thread Fujii Masao
On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 9:02 AM, Noah Misch wrote: > On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 11:34:34PM -0700, Noah Misch wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 01:20:05PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote: >> > On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 12:02 PM, Noah Misch wrote: >> > > On Wed, Apr

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-23 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 9:31 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > Ok, I got the point. > > At Wed, 19 Apr 2017 17:39:01 +0900 (Tokyo Standard Time), Kyotaro HORIGUCHI > wrote in >

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-23 Thread Noah Misch
On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 11:34:34PM -0700, Noah Misch wrote: > On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 01:20:05PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 12:02 PM, Noah Misch wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 01:52:53PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > > >> On Wed, Apr 19,

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-21 Thread Noah Misch
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 01:20:05PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 12:02 PM, Noah Misch wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 01:52:53PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > >> On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 12:34 PM, Noah Misch wrote: > >> > On

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-20 Thread Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
At Fri, 21 Apr 2017 13:20:05 +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote in > On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 12:02 PM, Noah Misch wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 01:52:53PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-20 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 12:02 PM, Noah Misch wrote: > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 01:52:53PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 12:34 PM, Noah Misch wrote: >> > On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 07:25:28PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: >> >> On Sun, Apr

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-20 Thread Noah Misch
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 01:52:53PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 12:34 PM, Noah Misch wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 07:25:28PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: > >> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 1:19 PM, Noah Misch wrote: > >> > On Fri, Apr

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-19 Thread Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
Ok, I got the point. At Wed, 19 Apr 2017 17:39:01 +0900 (Tokyo Standard Time), Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote in <20170419.173901.16598616.horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp> > > >> | > > >> | Quorum-based synchronous replication is basically more > > >> |

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-19 Thread Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
At Wed, 19 Apr 2017 03:03:38 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote in

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-18 Thread Michael Paquier
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 12:34 PM, Noah Misch wrote: >> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 07:25:28PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: >>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 1:19 PM, Noah Misch wrote: >>> >

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-18 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 12:34 PM, Noah Misch wrote: > On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 07:25:28PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: >> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 1:19 PM, Noah Misch wrote: >> > On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 11:58:23PM -0400, Noah Misch wrote: >> >> On Wed, Apr 05,

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-18 Thread Noah Misch
On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 07:25:28PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: > On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 1:19 PM, Noah Misch wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 11:58:23PM -0400, Noah Misch wrote: > >> On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 09:51:02PM -0400, Noah Misch wrote: > >> > On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-18 Thread Fujii Masao
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 6:40 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI > wrote: >> At Tue, 18 Apr 2017 14:58:50 +0900, Masahiko Sawada >> wrote in

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-18 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 6:40 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > At Tue, 18 Apr 2017 14:58:50 +0900, Masahiko Sawada > wrote in >> On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 3:04 AM, Fujii Masao

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-18 Thread Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
At Tue, 18 Apr 2017 14:58:50 +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote in > On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 3:04 AM, Fujii Masao wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 2:36 AM, Masahiko Sawada

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-18 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 3:04 AM, Fujii Masao wrote: > On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 2:36 AM, Masahiko Sawada > wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Masahiko Sawada >> wrote: >>> On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 10:51 AM, Noah Misch

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-17 Thread Fujii Masao
On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 2:36 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 10:51 AM, Noah Misch wrote: >>> On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 12:48:56AM +0900, Fujii Masao

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-16 Thread Fujii Masao
On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 1:19 PM, Noah Misch wrote: > On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 11:58:23PM -0400, Noah Misch wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 09:51:02PM -0400, Noah Misch wrote: >> > On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 12:48:56AM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: >> >> > > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-15 Thread Noah Misch
On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 11:58:23PM -0400, Noah Misch wrote: > On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 09:51:02PM -0400, Noah Misch wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 12:48:56AM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 09:49:58PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: > > > >> (2) > > > >> There will be

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-14 Thread Noah Misch
On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 09:51:02PM -0400, Noah Misch wrote: > On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 12:48:56AM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 09:49:58PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: > > >> (2) > > >> There will be still many source comments and documentations that > > >> we need to

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-14 Thread Simon Riggs
On 13 April 2017 at 18:47, Fujii Masao wrote: > But on second thought, I don't think that reporting NULL as the priority when > quorum-based sync replication is used is less confusing. When there is async > standby, we report 0 as its priority when

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-14 Thread Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
At Fri, 14 Apr 2017 10:47:46 +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote in > On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Michael Paquier > wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 2:47 AM, Fujii Masao

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-13 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 2:47 AM, Fujii Masao wrote: >> I'm thinking that it's less confusing to report always 0 as the priority of >> async standby whatever the setting of

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-13 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 2:47 AM, Fujii Masao wrote: > I'm thinking that it's less confusing to report always 0 as the priority of > async standby whatever the setting of synchronous_standby_names is. > Thought? Or we could have priority being reported to NULL for async

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-13 Thread Fujii Masao
On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 9:23 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 5:17 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI > wrote: >> Hello, >> >> At Thu, 6 Apr 2017 16:17:31 +0900, Masahiko Sawada >> wrote in

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-13 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 5:17 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > Hello, > > At Thu, 6 Apr 2017 16:17:31 +0900, Masahiko Sawada > wrote in

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-13 Thread Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
Hello, At Thu, 6 Apr 2017 16:17:31 +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote in

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-11 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 10:51 AM, Noah Misch wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 12:48:56AM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: >>> On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:45 PM, Noah Misch wrote: >>> > On

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-06 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 10:51 AM, Noah Misch wrote: > On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 12:48:56AM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:45 PM, Noah Misch wrote: >> > On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 09:49:58PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: >> >> Regarding this

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-06 Thread Petr Jelinek
On 06/04/17 03:51, Noah Misch wrote: > On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 12:48:56AM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:45 PM, Noah Misch wrote: >>> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 09:49:58PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: Regarding this feature, there are some loose ends. We

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-05 Thread Noah Misch
On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 12:48:56AM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:45 PM, Noah Misch wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 09:49:58PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: > >> Regarding this feature, there are some loose ends. We should work on > >> and complete them

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-05 Thread Fujii Masao
On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:45 PM, Noah Misch wrote: > On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 09:49:58PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: >> Regarding this feature, there are some loose ends. We should work on >> and complete them until the release. >> >> (1) >> Which synchronous replication method,

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-05 Thread Noah Misch
On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 09:49:58PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: > Regarding this feature, there are some loose ends. We should work on > and complete them until the release. > > (1) > Which synchronous replication method, priority or quorum, should be > chosen when neither FIRST nor ANY is specified

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-21 Thread Fujii Masao
On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 10:39 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > At Tue, 20 Dec 2016 23:47:22 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote > in >> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 2:46 PM, Michael

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-20 Thread Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
At Tue, 20 Dec 2016 23:47:22 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote in > On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 2:46 PM, Michael Paquier > wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Masahiko Sawada

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-20 Thread Fujii Masao
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 2:46 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Masahiko Sawada > wrote: >> Do we need to consider the sorting method and the selecting k-th >> latest LSN method? > > Honestly, nah. Tests are showing

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-20 Thread Fujii Masao
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 1:44 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Fujii Masao wrote: > >> Regarding this feature, there are some loose ends. We should work on >> and complete them until the release. > > Please list these in https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Open_Items so that we >

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-19 Thread Michael Paquier
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > Do we need to consider the sorting method and the selecting k-th > latest LSN method? Honestly, nah. Tests are showing that there are many more bottlenecks before that with just memory allocation and parsing. --

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-19 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 9:49 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: > On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 9:36 PM, Michael Paquier > wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 10:42 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: >>> Attached is the modified version of the patch.

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-19 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Fujii Masao wrote: > Regarding this feature, there are some loose ends. We should work on > and complete them until the release. Please list these in https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Open_Items so that we don't forget. -- Álvaro Herrerahttps://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-19 Thread Fujii Masao
On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 9:36 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 10:42 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: >> Attached is the modified version of the patch. Barring objections, I will >> commit this version. > > There is a whitespace: > $ git

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-18 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 10:42 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: > Attached is the modified version of the patch. Barring objections, I will > commit this version. There is a whitespace: $ git diff master --check src/backend/replication/syncrep.c:39: trailing whitespace. + * > Even

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-16 Thread Fujii Masao
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: > On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 2:38 PM, Michael Paquier > wrote: >> On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 6:08 PM, Masahiko Sawada >> wrote: >>> Attached latest v12 patch. >>> I changed

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-16 Thread Fujii Masao
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 2:38 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 6:08 PM, Masahiko Sawada > wrote: >> Attached latest v12 patch. >> I changed behavior of "N (standby_list)" to use the priority method >> and incorporated some

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-15 Thread Michael Paquier
On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 6:08 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > Attached latest v12 patch. > I changed behavior of "N (standby_list)" to use the priority method > and incorporated some review comments so far. Please review it. Some comments... +Another example of

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-15 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 3:06 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > At Thu, 15 Dec 2016 14:20:53 +0900, Masahiko Sawada > wrote in >> On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 11:23 AM, Michael

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-14 Thread Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
At Thu, 15 Dec 2016 14:20:53 +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote in > On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 11:23 AM, Michael Paquier > wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 11:04 AM, Fujii Masao

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-14 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 11:23 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 11:04 AM, Fujii Masao wrote: >> On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 6:47 AM, Michael Paquier >> wrote: >>> On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 11:34 PM, Fujii

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-14 Thread Amit Kapila
On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 7:53 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 11:04 AM, Fujii Masao wrote: >> On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 6:47 AM, Michael Paquier >> wrote: > >> So I'd like to propose to keep the

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-14 Thread Michael Paquier
On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 11:04 AM, Fujii Masao wrote: > On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 6:47 AM, Michael Paquier > wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 11:34 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: >>> If we drop the "standby_list" syntax, I don't

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-14 Thread Fujii Masao
On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 6:47 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 11:34 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: >> If we drop the "standby_list" syntax, I don't think that new parameter is >> necessary. We can keep s_s_names and just drop the

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-14 Thread Michael Paquier
On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 11:34 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: > If we drop the "standby_list" syntax, I don't think that new parameter is > necessary. We can keep s_s_names and just drop the support for that syntax > from s_s_names. This may be ok if we're really in "break all the

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-14 Thread Fujii Masao
On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 5:06 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > At Tue, 13 Dec 2016 08:46:06 +0530, Amit Kapila > wrote in >> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 9:54 PM, Masahiko

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-13 Thread Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
At Tue, 13 Dec 2016 08:46:06 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote in > On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 9:54 PM, Masahiko Sawada > wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 9:52 PM, Fujii Masao

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-12 Thread Amit Kapila
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 9:54 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 9:52 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: >> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 9:31 PM, Masahiko Sawada >> wrote: >>> On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 5:17 PM, Amit Kapila

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-12 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 9:52 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: > On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 9:31 PM, Masahiko Sawada > wrote: >> On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 5:17 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: >>> On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 3:02 PM, Masahiko Sawada

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-12 Thread Fujii Masao
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 9:31 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 5:17 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: >> On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 3:02 PM, Masahiko Sawada >> wrote: >>> On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 4:39 PM, Michael Paquier

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-12 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 5:17 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 3:02 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: >> On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 4:39 PM, Michael Paquier >> wrote: >>> On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 9:07 AM, Robert Haas

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-10 Thread Amit Kapila
On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 3:02 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 4:39 PM, Michael Paquier > wrote: >> On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 9:07 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >>> You could do that, but first I would code up the

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-08 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 4:39 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 9:07 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >> You could do that, but first I would code up the simplest, cleanest >> algorithm you can think of and see if it even shows up in a

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-07 Thread Michael Paquier
On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 9:07 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > You could do that, but first I would code up the simplest, cleanest > algorithm you can think of and see if it even shows up in a 'perf' > profile. Microbenchmarking is probably overkill here unless a problem > is

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-07 Thread Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
Hello, context switch was complete that time, sorry. There's multiple "target LET"s. So we need kth-largest LTEs. At Wed, 7 Dec 2016 19:04:23 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote in

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-07 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 11:26 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 12:32 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: >> So, isn't it better to compare the performance of some algorithms and >> confirm which is the best for quorum commit? Since this code

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-07 Thread Michael Paquier
On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 5:17 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 4:05 PM, Michael Paquier > wrote: >> Indeed, I haven't thought about that, and that's a no-brainer. That >> would remove the need to allocate and sort each array,

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-07 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 4:05 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 2:49 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI > wrote: >> Aside from measurement of the two sorting methods, I'd like to >> point out that quorum commit basically doesn't need

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-06 Thread Michael Paquier
On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 2:49 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > Aside from measurement of the two sorting methods, I'd like to > point out that quorum commit basically doesn't need > sorting. Counting conforming santdbys while scanning the > walsender(receiver) LSN

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-06 Thread Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
At Wed, 7 Dec 2016 13:26:38 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote in

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-06 Thread Michael Paquier
On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 12:32 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: > So, isn't it better to compare the performance of some algorithms and > confirm which is the best for quorum commit? Since this code is hot, i.e., > can be very frequently executed, I'd like to avoid waste of cycle as

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-06 Thread Fujii Masao
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 6:57 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 1:11 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: >> On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 8:03 PM, Masahiko Sawada >> wrote: >>> On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 10:27 PM, Michael Paquier

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-06 Thread Michael Paquier
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 6:57 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 1:11 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: >> If M (i.e., number of quorum sync standbys) is enough large, >> your choice would be good. But usually M seems not so large. >> > > Thank

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-06 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 1:11 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: > On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 8:03 PM, Masahiko Sawada > wrote: >> On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 10:27 PM, Michael Paquier >> wrote: >>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 7:08 PM, Masahiko

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-12-05 Thread Fujii Masao
On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 8:03 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 10:27 PM, Michael Paquier > wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 7:08 PM, Masahiko Sawada >> wrote: >>> Attached latest version patch

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-11-28 Thread Michael Paquier
On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 8:03 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 10:27 PM, Michael Paquier > wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 7:08 PM, Masahiko Sawada >> wrote: >>> Attached latest version patch

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-11-28 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 10:27 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 7:08 PM, Masahiko Sawada > wrote: >> Attached latest version patch incorporated review comments. After more >> thought, I agree and changed the value of standby

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-11-26 Thread Michael Paquier
On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 7:08 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > Attached latest version patch incorporated review comments. After more > thought, I agree and changed the value of standby priority in quorum > method so that it's not set 1 forcibly. The all standby priorities are >

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-11-15 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 5:39 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 10:12 PM, Michael Paquier > wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 12:25 AM, Masahiko Sawada >> wrote: >>> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 10:35 PM,

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-11-14 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 10:12 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 12:25 AM, Masahiko Sawada > wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 10:35 PM, Michael Paquier >> wrote: >>> + if (SyncRepConfig->sync_method

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2016-11-08 Thread Michael Paquier
On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 12:25 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 10:35 PM, Michael Paquier > wrote: >> + if (SyncRepConfig->sync_method == SYNC_REP_PRIORITY) >> + return SyncRepGetSyncStandbysPriority(am_sync); >> +

  1   2   >