On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 2:06 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> How should the backends waiting for replication behave when >> synchrnous_standby_names >> is set to '' and the configuration file is reloaded? Now they keep >> waiting for the ACK from the >> standby. But I think that it's more natural for them to get out of the >> wait state and complete >> the transaction in that case. If we'll change them in that way, we >> would no longer need >> something like "pg_ctl standalone" which I mentioned in another thread. >> Thought? > > I think so. Looking at assign_synchronous_standby_names, the > following code just looks wrong: > > if (doit && list_length(elemlist) > 0) > sync_standbys_defined = true; > > Once sync_standbys_defined becomes true, there's no way for it to ever > become false again. That can't be right. That means that if you > disable sync rep by zeroing out synchronous_standby_names, backends > that already existed at the time you made the change will continue to > act as though sync rep is enabled until they exit.
Yes, that's a bug. Yeah, sync rep currently seems to have many TODO items. I added some of them in wiki. http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_9.1_Open_Items Regards, -- Fujii Masao NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
