From: | a(dot)pervushina(at)postgrespro(dot)ru |
---|---|
To: | Anna Akenteva <a(dot)akenteva(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
Cc: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru, i(dot)kartyshov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru, amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] make async slave to wait for lsn to be replayed |
Date: | 2020-10-02 12:02:33 |
Message-ID: | [email protected] |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Anna Akenteva писал 2020-04-08 22:36:
> On 2020-04-08 04:09, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
>
> I like your suggested keywords! I think that "AFTER" + "WITHIN" sound
> the most natural. We could completely give up the LSN keyword for now.
> The final command could look something like:
>
> BEGIN AFTER ‘0/303EC60’ WITHIN '5 seconds';
> or
> BEGIN AFTER ‘0/303EC60’ WITHIN 5000;
Hello,
I've changed the syntax of the command from BEGIN [ WAIT FOR LSN value [
TIMEOUT delay ]] to BEGIN [ AFTER value [ WITHIN delay ]] and removed
all the unnecessary keywords.
Best regards,
Alexandra Pervushina.
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
begin_after.patch | text/x-diff | 26.5 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2020-10-02 12:06:48 | Re: Error code missing for "wrong length of inner sequence" error |
Previous Message | Amit Langote | 2020-10-02 11:56:32 | a misbehavior of partition row movement (?) |