Re: [HACKERS] Multiple synchronous_standby_names rules

2017-01-11 Thread Michael Paquier
On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 9:53 AM, James Sewell  wrote:
> What is needed to support this is the ability to configure Px with something 
> like:
>
>  1 (P1, P2, P3), 1 (D1, D2, D3)
>
> Would there be any appetite for this - or would it be seen as over 
> complication of the current rules?

There have been discussions about being able to do that and there are
really use cases where that would be useful. As lately quorum commit
has been committed, we have a better idea of the grammar to use
(yeah!), though there are a couple of things remaining regarding the
design of node subsets:
- How to define group names? Making them mandatory would likely be the
way to go.
- How to represent that intuitively in pg_stat_replication? Perhaps
the answer here is an extra column in this system view.
-- 
Michael


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers


[HACKERS] Multiple synchronous_standby_names rules

2017-01-11 Thread James Sewell
Hello,

When working with a production (P) and a DR (D) environment it is often a
requirement to be able to protect against data loss when promoting within a
site, and also when losing A and promoting a master at D.

The current synchronous_standby_names do not allow this.

In a simple example we could take the following nodes:

P1 (current master), P2, P3
D1, D2, D3

Where P1 is replicating to (P2, P3, D1, D2, D3).

The closest synchronous_standby_names  setting you could get to my use case
would be:

1 (D1, D2, D3)

This would allow the loss of either site without losing data - however it
would not allow promotion within site P from P1 -> (P2 | P3)  without the
potential for data loss.

What is needed to support this is the ability to configure Px with
something like:

 1 (P1, P2, P3), 1 (D1, D2, D3)

Would there be any appetite for this - or would it be seen as over
complication of the current rules?

Cheers,


James Sewell,
PostgreSQL Team Lead / Solutions Architect



Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf, 26-32 Pirrama Road, Pyrmont NSW 2009
*P *(+61) 2 8099 9000 <(+61)%202%208099%209000>  *W* www.jirotech.com  *F *
(+61) 2 8099 9099 <(+61)%202%208099%209000>

-- 

--
The contents of this email are confidential and may be subject to legal or 
professional privilege and copyright. No representation is made that this 
email is free of viruses or other defects. If you have received this 
communication in error, you may not copy or distribute any part of it or 
otherwise disclose its contents to anyone. Please advise the sender of your 
incorrect receipt of this correspondence.