Fri Jan 19 14:00:00 PST 2007
- Previous message: [Slony1-general] slony replication lag and pgpool
- Next message: [Slony1-general] subscriber box drive failure....recovery
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Jan 19, 2007, at 5:55 AM, Brad Nicholson wrote: > You should raise your questions with the folks on the pgpool list. > Slony people probably aren't the right audience to discuss pgpool mods > with. A couple quick points though - Agreed. I threw it against this list just in case someone had some non-pgpool insite into this issue. My apologies for contributing a little bit of noise on the list. >> Otherwise, they go >> to the slave. As I'm sure you know, this can cause problems when >> SELECT queries are run against the slave and the data hasn't >> arrived yet >> due to the replication lag. > > That problem doesn't exist if you put your queries inside a > transaction. > They will never go to a subscriber. This is true but once you commit they will instantly start going to the subscriber. That is the problem. Bundling the queries into one transaction isn't an option. The typical scenario for web apps where this is a problem is when form data is inserted into the database within a transaction and then a user is redirected to another page which queries the database looking for that new data. This is where the replication lag will bite you.
- Previous message: [Slony1-general] slony replication lag and pgpool
- Next message: [Slony1-general] subscriber box drive failure....recovery
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Slony1-general mailing list