On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 5:10 PM, Yeb Havinga <yebhavi...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2011-03-02 21:26, Kevin Grittner wrote: >> >> I think including "synchronous" is OK as long as it's properly >> qualified. Off-hand thoughts in no particular order: >> >> semi-synchronous >> conditionally synchronous >> synchronous with automatic failover to standalone > > It would be good to name the concept equal to how other DBMSses call it, if > they have a similar concept - don't know if Mysql's semisynchronous > replication is the same, but after a quick read it sounds like it does.
Here's the link: http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.5/en/replication-semisync.html I think this is mostly about how many slaves have to ack the commit. It's not entirely clear to me what happens if a slave is set up but not connected at the moment. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
