On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 7:28 AM, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Yes, that can happen. As people will no doubt observe, this seems to be > an argument for wait-forever. What we actually need is a wait that lasts > longer than it takes for us to decide to failover, if the standby is > actually up and this is some kind of split brain situation. That way the > clients are still waiting when failover occurs. WAL is missing, but > since we didn't acknowledge the client we are OK to treat that situation > as if it were an abort.
Oracle Data Guard in the maximum availability mode behaves that way? I'm sure that you are implementing something like the maximum availability mode rather than the maximum protection one. So I'd like to know how the data loss situation I described can be avoided in the maximum availability mode. Regards, -- Fujii Masao NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
