On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 08:21:08AM -0500, Shaun Thomas wrote: > >But, putting that aside, why not write a piece of middleware that > >does precisely this, or whatever you want? It can live on the same > >machine as Postgres and ack synchronous commit when nobody is home, > >and notify (e.g. page) you in the most precise way you want if nobody > >is home "for a while". > > You're right that there are lots of ways to kinda get this ability, > they're just not mature enough or capable enough to really matter. > Tailing the log to watch for secondary disconnect is too slow. Monit > or Nagios style checks are too slow and unreliable. A custom-built > middle-layer (a master-slave plugin for Pacemaker, for example) is > too slow. All of these would rely on some kind of check interval. > Set that too high, and we get 10,000xn missed transactions for n > seconds. Too low, and we'd increase the likelihood of false > positives and unnecessary detachments.
Well, the problem also exists if add it as an internal database feature --- how long do we wait to consider the standby dead, how do we inform administrators, etc. I don't think anyone says the feature is useless, but is isn't going to be a simple boolean either. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
