MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8;
 format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2018 14:24:24 +0300
From: Ivan Kartyshov <i.kartyshov@postgrespro.ru>
To: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] make async slave to wait for lsn to be replayed
In-Reply-To: <20180302004714.nf6mntdwdjsbexmk@alap3.anarazel.de>
References: <0240c26c-9f84-30ea-fca9-93ab2df5f305@postgrespro.ru>
 <CAEepm=105OCnhe9cAdYp0Vy1b2VmQFX6n9qM+nx70GXUKgjF9A@mail.gmail.com>
 <c585d9a0-5bda-778e-e628-dd30959d71d3@postgrespro.ru>
 <CAPpHfdvUnqY8TTwZ4gMOcwY+3S+N=07gpuL61p41E6SdAetvCg@mail.gmail.com>
 <abcff0b4e3ce1c2a4d14f54e7031dc15@postgrespro.ru>
 <CA+CSw_uW2yVMMvQ8S2hAfbobXSDhCF0uBZ3zjYL650Z=-0PkFQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <de402dc80e39c358dedf174c13bb5226@postgrespro.ru>
 <CANP8+jL_mq4o3L99rP=ru1UrJug+_ytQupKWP-jn6+3EnqLgnw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+Tgmoa_gosB4o3jPjs0AjQWuQ2747+3_Zk+Kzbar30+62FCzA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANP8+jJyYEiktigY7PmupErzB4YQu+TT+6NU3Ya9CzZgiSqvQA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20180302004714.nf6mntdwdjsbexmk@alap3.anarazel.de>
Message-ID: <eba47566350c8b221645e4d7f202fe07@postgrespro.ru>
User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.2.4
Precedence: bulk

Andres Freund писал 2018-03-02 03:47:
> On 2018-02-02 19:41:37 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> On 2 February 2018 at 18:46, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> 
>> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 3:46 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> >> In PG11, I propose the following command, sticking mostly to Ants'
>> >> syntax, and allowing to wait for multiple events before it returns. It
>> >> doesn't hold snapshot and will not get cancelled by Hot Standby.
>> >>
>> >> WAIT FOR event [, event ...] options
>> >>
>> >> event is
>> >> LSN value
>> >> TIMESTAMP value
>> >>
>> >> options
>> >> TIMEOUT delay
>> >> UNTIL TIMESTAMP timestamp
>> >> (we have both, so people don't need to do math, they can use whichever
>> >> they have)
>> >
>> > WAIT FOR TIMEOUT sounds a lot like SELECT pg_sleep_for(), and WAIT
>> > UNTIL TIMESTAMP sounds a lot like SELECT pg_sleep_until().
>> 
>> Yes, it sounds very similar. It's the behavior that differs; I read
>> and agreed with yours and Thomas' earlier comments on that point.
>> 
>> As pointed out upthread, the key difference is whether it gets
>> cancelled on Hot Standby and whether you can call it in a non-READ
>> COMMITTED transaction.
> 
> Given that nobody has updated the patch or even discussed doing so, I
> assume this would CF issue should now appropriately be classified as
> returned with feedback?

Hello, I now is preparing the patch over syntax that Simon offered. And 
in few day I will update the patch.
Thank you for your interest in thread.

-- 
Ivan Kartyshov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company