MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <9290b55b6ae2b04e002ca9dadadd1cca09461482.camel@cybertec.at>
 <20220805.114916.994654810780821553.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
 <CALj2ACWPMYoPSC3t-9uW+0gqDUcJf1mLww6hHzo2V2AvE-Tu+w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20220809.161236.1486509314201074910.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
 <CALj2ACXmMWtpmuT-=v8F+Lk4QCbdkeN+yHKXeRGKFfjG96YbKA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALj2ACUO6oz-43ryqfMOVZ_Q-N10C5tkzKku12+QV02NnXsDrw@mail.gmail.com>
 <YzYh3NpCQAFkA6lF@momjian.us>
 <CAAhFRxjFGSk-hVTjnpFwm1XBUcHL8Obugt=P+ixV5AD9H+Kkrw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAAhFRxgcBy-UCvyJ1ZZ1UKf4Owrx4J2X1F4tN_FD=fh5wZgdkw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALj2ACVG5KCoPD_5AF2_u07HuZe4ajaLWKycB6OBYsGuj67OhA@mail.gmail.com>
 <Y4UhPZxpE4K4+Lyn@momjian.us>
In-Reply-To: <Y4UhPZxpE4K4+Lyn@momjian.us>
From: Andrey Borodin <amborodin86@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2022 13:31:39 -0800
Message-ID: 
 <CAAhFRxgYTEqfsqj5MJ0XXGjTUvVfLFxQmD317Bw5vYBHe_sBvQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: An attempt to avoid
 locally-committed-but-not-replicated-to-standby-transactions
 in synchronous replication
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>,
	Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>,
 Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>,
	PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>,
	SATYANARAYANA NARLAPURAM <satyanarlapuram@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAAhFRxgYTEqfsqj5MJ0XXGjTUvVfLFxQmD317Bw5vYBHe_sBvQ%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 12:59 PM Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
>
> You can prepare a patch, but it unlikely to get much interest until you
> get agreement on what the behavior should be.

We discussed the approach on 2020's Unconference [0]. And there kind
of was an agreement.
Then I made a presentation on FOSDEM with all the details [1].
The patch had been on commitfest since 2019 [2]. There were reviewers
in the CF entry, and we kind of had an agreement.
Jeff Davis proposed a similar patch [3]. And we certainly agreed about cancels.
And now Bharath is proposing the same.

We have the interest and agreement.


Best regards, Andrey Borodin.

[0] https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PgCon_2020_Developer_Unconference/Edge_cases_of_synchronous_replication_in_HA_solutions
[1] https://archive.fosdem.org/2021/schedule/event/postgresql_caveats_of_replication/attachments/slides/4365/export/events/attachments/postgresql_caveats_of_replication/slides/4365/sides.pdf
[2] https://commitfest.postgresql.org/26/2402/
[3] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/6a052e81060824a8286148b1165bafedbd7c86cd.camel%40j-davis.com#415dc2f7d41b8a251b419256407bb64d