Re: [HACKERS] Timeout for asynchronous replication Re: Timeout and wait-forever in sync rep

2010-12-20 Thread Aidan Van Dyk
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 3:17 AM, Fujii Masao wrote: > OK. How about keepalive-like parameters and behaviors? > >    replication_keepalives_idle >    replication_keepalives_interval >    replication_keepalives_count > > The master sends the keepalive packet if replication_keepalives_idle > elapsed

Re: [HACKERS] Timeout for asynchronous replication Re: Timeout and wait-forever in sync rep

2010-12-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 3:17 AM, Fujii Masao wrote: > On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 12:20 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >> Yeah.  If we rely on the TCP send buffer filling up, then the amount >> of time the master takes to notice a dead standby is going to be hard >> for the user to predict.  I think the stand

Re: [HACKERS] Timeout for asynchronous replication Re: Timeout and wait-forever in sync rep

2010-12-20 Thread Fujii Masao
On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 12:20 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > Yeah.  If we rely on the TCP send buffer filling up, then the amount > of time the master takes to notice a dead standby is going to be hard > for the user to predict.  I think the standby ought to send some sort > of heartbeat and the master s

Re: [HACKERS] Timeout for asynchronous replication Re: Timeout and wait-forever in sync rep

2010-12-06 Thread Fujii Masao
On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 11:54 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > Hmm, that's actually a quite different timeout than what's required for > synchronous replication. In synchronous replication, you need to get an > acknowledgment within a timeout. This patch only puts a timeout on how long > we wait to

Re: [HACKERS] Timeout for asynchronous replication Re: Timeout and wait-forever in sync rep

2010-12-06 Thread Robert Haas
On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 9:54 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: >>> This occurred to me that the timeout would be required even for >>> asynchronous streaming replication. So, how about implementing the >>> replication timeout feature before synchronous replication itself? >> >> Here is the patch. This

Re: [HACKERS] Timeout for asynchronous replication Re: Timeout and wait-forever in sync rep

2010-12-06 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 06.12.2010 08:51, Fujii Masao wrote: On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 3:42 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 9:41 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: The timeout doesn't oppose to 'wait-forever'. Even if you choose 'wait -forever' (i.e., you set allow_standalone_master to false), the master should d

[HACKERS] Timeout for asynchronous replication Re: Timeout and wait-forever in sync rep

2010-12-05 Thread Fujii Masao
On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 3:42 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: > On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 9:41 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: >> The timeout doesn't oppose to 'wait-forever'. Even if you choose 'wait >> -forever' (i.e., you set allow_standalone_master to false), the master >> should detect the standby crash as soon a