Re: DRAFT 9.6 release
Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.db.postgresql.advocacy |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 03:22:18PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > So that's usually what I mean when I say quorum commit. But apparently > our feature does something slightly different? > > "For example, a setting of 3 (s1, s2, s3, s4) makes transaction commits > wait until their WAL records are received by three higher-priority > standbys chosen from standby servers s1, s2, s3 and s4" > > What does that mean exactly? If I do: > > 3 ( s1, s2, s3, s4, s5 ) > > And a commit is ack'd by s2, s3, and s5, what happens? As I understand it, it can continue with those three servers sending a confirmation back. -- Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription + -- Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([email protected]) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy