On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 5:28 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 11:00 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>
>> Yes, it might be too hard, but lets look.
>
> Your committer has timed out ;-)
>
> committed write mode only
Thanks for the commit!
The apply mode is attractive, but I need more t
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 11:00 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Yes, it might be too hard, but lets look.
Your committer has timed out ;-)
committed write mode only
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
--
Sent vi
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 10:47 AM, Fujii Masao wrote:
>>> I'm afraid I could not understand your idea. Could you explain it in
>>> more detail?
>>
>> We either tell libpqwalreceiver about the latch, or we tell
>> walreceiver about the socket used by libpqwalreceiver.
>>
>> In either case we share
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 9:53 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 10:03 AM, Fujii Masao wrote:
>
To make the walreceiver call WaitLatchOrSocket(), we would need to
merge it and libpq_select() into one function. But the former is the
backend
function and the latter
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 10:03 AM, Fujii Masao wrote:
>>> To make the walreceiver call WaitLatchOrSocket(), we would need to
>>> merge it and libpq_select() into one function. But the former is the backend
>>> function and the latter is the frontend one. Now I have no good idea to
>>> merge them c
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 6:28 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 9:02 AM, Fujii Masao wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 12:45 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
>>>
>> Please add the Apply mode.
>
> OK, will do.
Done
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 9:02 AM, Fujii Masao wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 12:45 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
>>
> Please add the Apply mode.
OK, will do.
>>>
>>> Done. Attached is the updated version of the patch.
>>
>> I notice
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 12:45 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
>
Please add the Apply mode.
>>>
>>> OK, will do.
>>
>> Done. Attached is the updated version of the patch.
>
> I notice that the Apply mode isn't fully implemented. I had in mind
> tha
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 12:45 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
>>> Please add the Apply mode.
>>
>> OK, will do.
>
> Done. Attached is the updated version of the patch.
I notice that the Apply mode isn't fully implemented. I had in mind
that you would add the latch required to respond more quickly when
on
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 12:45 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
>
>> Done. Attached is the updated version of the patch.
>
> Thanks.
>
> I'll review this first, but can't start immediately. Please expect
> something back in 2 days.
On initial review thi
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 12:45 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
> Done. Attached is the updated version of the patch.
Thanks.
I'll review this first, but can't start immediately. Please expect
something back in 2 days.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 9:27 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 7:30 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 7:41 AM, Fujii Masao wrote:
>>>
Thought? Comments?
>>>
>>> This is almost exactly the same as my patc
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
>> In my patch, the reason I avoided doing WRITE mode (which we had
>> previously referred to as RECV) was that no fsync of the WAL contents
>> takes place. In that case we are applying changes using un-fsynced WAL
>> data and in case of crash
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 7:30 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 7:41 AM, Fujii Masao wrote:
>>
>>> Thought? Comments?
>>
>> This is almost exactly the same as my patch series
>> "syncrep_queues.v[1,2].patch" earlier this year.
Hi,
http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/AANLkTilgyL3Y1jkDVHX02433COq7JLmqicsqmOsbuyA1%40mail.gmail.com
Previously I proposed the replication mode "recv" on the above thread,
but it's not
committed yet. Now I'd like to propose that mode again because it's
useful to reduce
the overhead of syn
15 matches
Mail list logo