On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 10:33 PM, Samrat Revagade <revagade.sam...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 3:40 PM, Sameer Thakur <samthaku...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> >> >> >>>> >>> >>> >Attached patch combines documentation patch and source-code patch. >> >> >> I have had a stab at reviewing the documentation. Have a look. >> > > Thanks. > Attached patch implements suggestions in documentation. > But comments from Fujii-san still needs to be implemented . > We will implement them soon. >
I have attached the patch which modify based on Fujii-san suggested. If synchronous_transfer is set 'data_flush', behaviour of synchronous_transfer with synchronous_commit is (1) synchronous_commit = on A data flush should wait for the corresponding WAL to be flushed in the standby (2) synchronous_commit = remote_write A data flush should wait for the corresponding WAL to be written to OS in the standby. (3) synchronous_commit = local (4) synchronous_commit = off A data flush should wait for the corresponding WAL to be written locally in the master. Even if user changes synchronous_commit value in transaction, other process (e.g. checkpointer process) can't confirm it. Currently patch, each processes uses locally synchronous_commit. Regards, ------- Sawada Masahiko
synchronous_transfer_v10.patch
Description: Binary data
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
