On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 11:26:04AM -0400, Jesper Pedersen wrote: > On 7/10/19 10:24 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > +1 to document this caveat. >> >> How about >> Note that while WAL will be flushed with this setting, >> <application>pg_receivewal</application> never applies it, so >> <xref linkend="guc-synchronous-commit"/> must not be set to >> <literal>remote_apply</literal> if >> <application>pg_receivewal</application> >> is the only synchronous standby. >> ? >> > > Sure.
This is not true in all cases as since 9.6 it is possible to specify multiple synchronous standbys. So if for example pg_receivewal and another synchronous standby are set in s_s_names and that the number of a FIRST (priority-based) or ANY (quorum set) is two, then the same issue exists, but this documentation is incorrect. I think that we should have a more extensive wording here, like "if pg_receivewal is part of a quorum-based or priority-based set of synchronous standbys." Thoughts? -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
