Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-2.hub.org [200.46.204.251])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6543B1337E9A
	for <pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@mail.postgresql.org>;
	Thu, 30 Dec 2010 17:17:06 -0400 (AST)
Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86])
	by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.251]) (amavisd-maia,
	port 10024) with ESMTP id 15166-01-6
	for <pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@mail.postgresql.org>;
	Thu, 30 Dec 2010 21:16:58 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from cronos.madness.at (madness.at [217.196.146.217])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C895E1337ECA
	for <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>;
	Thu, 30 Dec 2010 17:08:57 -0400 (AST)
Received: from gatekeeper.kaltenbrunner.cc ([83.215.243.9]
 helo=[192.168.8.22])
	by cronos.madness.at with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <stefan@kaltenbrunner.cc>)
	id 1PYPju-0002bw-1P; Thu, 30 Dec 2010 22:08:52 +0100
Message-ID: <4D1CF4E2.5000208@kaltenbrunner.cc>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2010 22:08:50 +0100
From: Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan@kaltenbrunner.cc>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US;
	rv:1.9.1.15) Gecko/20101030 Iceowl/1.0b1 Icedove/3.0.10
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>
CC: Robert Treat <rob@xzilla.net>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Sync Rep Design
References: <1293729972.1892.23804.camel@ebony>	
	<4D1CC47E.7050207@kaltenbrunner.cc>
	<1293735853.1892.24886.camel@ebony>	
	<AANLkTi=dr9TuYRLMWjPkJdL1Jjg+TAJXPJQbLGiN1Pag@mail.gmail.com>	
	<1293741390.1892.25918.camel@ebony>	
	<AANLkTim3mEVaP9eJsqticw600sSomHhJgsQVgjoDxASA@mail.gmail.com>
	<1293742878.1892.26205.camel@ebony>
In-Reply-To: <1293742878.1892.26205.camel@ebony>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 tagged_above=-5 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 201012/2504
X-Sequence-Number: 177766

On 12/30/2010 10:01 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-12-30 at 15:51 -0500, Robert Treat wrote:
>
>> Still, one thing that has me concerned is that in the case of two
>> slaves, you don't know which one is the more up-to-date one if you
>> need to failover. It'd be nice if you could just guarantee they both
>> are...
>
> Regrettably, nobody can know that, without checking.

how exactly would you check? - this seems like something that needs to 
be done from the SQL and the CLI level and also very well documented 
(which I cannot see in your proposal).



Stefan