On 8/21/2012 6:16 PM, Christopher Browne wrote: > The one thing that I'd be a *bit* concerned about is the 57K event > lag. At one point, I recall there being a possible troublesome case > where one of the queries for the first SYNC processing after that > could time out when trying to read in all of the tens of thousands of > events. It would be nicer if, during this laggy period, SYNCs got > generated somewhat less often, let's say, every 10-20s rather than > every 0.5s.
That can only happen on slon startup, when the remote_listen thread selects all NEW events. During the copy_set(), the remote listener is still getting these events and queues them in memory. Unless something is interrupting the copy, I'm not worried yet. Jan -- Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security. -- Benjamin Franklin _______________________________________________ Slony1-general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slony.info/mailman/listinfo/slony1-general
