Received: from magus.postgresql.org (magus.postgresql.org [87.238.57.229])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9625F4C1A83
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Thu, 10 May 2012 12:12:29 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from mail-pz0-f46.google.com ([209.85.210.46])
	by magus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <maumau307@gmail.com>) id 1SSV2V-0005du-43
	for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Thu, 10 May 2012 15:12:28 +0000
Received: by dady13 with SMTP id y13so1824297dad.19
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Thu, 10 May 2012 08:12:09 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=message-id:from:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:subject:date
	:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-priority
	:x-msmail-priority:x-mailer:x-mimeole;
	bh=lGyVgC9k4XRdxD+XcILIxk1bC2NlhsLTDJKPW9yjxDY=;
	b=E974ToPg5QFOrCSY7jfYWHKe/YcYE9jFwx+fyXY9rlxRweoojWcVeVjM57KUN3QI6f
	Ac0e3yFAig1iM9XeMwypb7+9ABDHTqPLAvzN9KwgDmC0G6OYXKXatcZwgwOKS4eMtVhQ
	/evETQx1WQwxN8kUpoYlmPZHGGcMOvDHU6iXsEfSL0NFy4kP7m8S/ONZ+b+82u02FxVr
	cy3cJNcKl528Zy/YXi+EjEhUhTINqSTOXR4zYiCh7yAW3tGKmBoIzw/bAyq5qXVKuUfV
	P51ESXdkCMXTOaE7kNFL4XxnGIxnyhVH+RzAQF15kxQzRzT9cylrLpjjzsn6NF9hjW6X
	qKDg==
Received: by 10.68.213.101 with SMTP id nr5mr15830417pbc.131.1336662729283;
	Thu, 10 May 2012 08:12:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from maumau (p1042-ipbfp401sizuokaden.shizuoka.ocn.ne.jp.
	[122.20.60.42])
	by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id kb12sm9788933pbb.15.2012.05.10.08.12.07
	(version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 10 May 2012 08:12:08 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <8DBF8CB125BF48D0AC562EA307A2F137@maumau>
From: "MauMau" <maumau307@gmail.com>
To: "Tomas Vondra" <tv@fuzzy.cz>
Cc: "Claudio Freire" <klaussfreire@gmail.com>,
	"Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure@gmail.com>, <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
References: 
 <61B94EF1D7774715BC565DD84C731BDD@maumau><CAHyXU0w4vxULonSa+bJgALDK6gYHyvXcGj-VaZNE717ttkfXoA@mail.gmail.com><E7D1C27BDA0541B48AAA48ED4C0B94B5@maumau>
	<CAGTBQpYtod6ee6km0=C+U5yL9Wy5_9Bo7Nm719ymA42-SggLSA@mail.gmail.com>
	<37AC2C75CBA4411F84F5F995EDF91503@maumau>
	<5c3033fd2e913a6f10d02a4a3460ee15.squirrel@sq.gransy.com>
In-Reply-To: <5c3033fd2e913a6f10d02a4a3460ee15.squirrel@sq.gransy.com>
Subject: Re: Could synchronous streaming replication really degrade the
	performance of the primary?
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 00:11:01 +0900
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8"; reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6002.18197
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6002.18463
X-Pg-Spam-Score: -2.0 (--)
X-Archive-Number: 201205/79
X-Sequence-Number: 46903

From: "Tomas Vondra" <tv@fuzzy.cz>
> There were some nice talks about performance impact of sync rep, for
> example this one:
>
> 
> http://www.2ndquadrant.com/static/2quad/media/pdfs/talks/SyncRepDurability.pdf
>
> There's also a video:
>
>  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XL7j8hTd6R8

Thanks. The video is especially interesting. I'll tell my aquaintance to 
check it, too.

Regards
MauMau