Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-5.hub.org [200.46.204.29]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0618C1337BDA for ; Wed, 23 Mar 2011 09:16:51 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.29]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 33674-07 for ; Wed, 23 Mar 2011 12:16:42 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from shaykin.bluegap.ch (shaykin.bluegap.ch [78.46.81.73]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DE861337BB4 for ; Wed, 23 Mar 2011 09:16:40 -0300 (ADT) Received: from [IPv6:2001:1620:f70:16:216:e6ff:fed5:fc9] ([2001:1620:f70:16:216:e6ff:fed5:fc9]) (AUTH: LOGIN markus@bluegap.ch, TLS: TLSv1/SSLv3,256bits,AES256-SHA) by shaykin.bluegap.ch with esmtp; Wed, 23 Mar 2011 13:16:40 +0100 id 0000000002A08009.000000004D89E4A8.00004274 Message-ID: <4D89E4A7.4090900@bluegap.ch> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 13:16:39 +0100 From: Markus Wanner User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101226 Icedove/3.0.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Robert Haas CC: Aidan Van Dyk , Simon Riggs , Heikki Linnakangas , Kevin Grittner , MARK CALLAGHAN , Alvaro Herrera , Andrew Dunstan , pgsql-hackers Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Efficient transaction-controlled synchronous replication. References: <1299454125.1696.6138.camel@ebony> <4D74896C.5030402@enterprisedb.com> <4D74DDFA.70800@dunslane.net> <4D74E584.7080409@enterprisedb.com> <4D74E9FA.7070202@dunslane.net> <4D74F3AE.9000802@dunslane.net> <4D74FDEC.5040406@enterprisedb.com> <4D74FF15.1070804@dunslane.net> <1299513979-sup-1987@alvh.no-ip.org> <4D832571.5030808@bluegap.ch> <1300457958.18619.13780.camel@ebony> <4D832B4D020000250003BA98@gw.wicourts.gov> <4D837EA2.2070205@enterprisedb.com> <1300465171.18619.15193.camel@ebony> <4D83B02A.5090105@bluegap.ch> <1300476590.18619.18115.camel@ebony> <4D83B54C.2030708@bluegap.ch> <4D89A0D1.4030601@bluegap.ch> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.409 tagged_above=-5 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9, FS_REPLICA=3.599, SARE_SPEC_REPLICA=0.72, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Archive-Number: 201103/1348 X-Sequence-Number: 184598 On 03/23/2011 12:52 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > Yes. What this won't do is let you build a big load-balancing network > (at least not without great caution about what you assume). This sounds too strong to me. Session-aware load balancing is pretty common these days. It's the default mode of PgBouncer, for example. Not much caution required there, IMO. Or what pitfalls did you have in mind? > What it > will do is make it really, really hard to lose committed transactions. > Both good things, but different. ..you can still get both at the same time. At least as long as you are happy with session-aware load balancing. And who really needs finer grained balancing? (Note that no matter how fine-grained you balance, you are still bound to a (single core of a) single node. That changes with distributed querying, and things really start to get interesting there... but we are far from that, yet). Regards Markus