Jan Wieck wrote:
> On 2/13/2008 10:40 AM, Dawid Kuroczko wrote:
>> On Feb 13, 2008 4:07 PM, Andrew Sullivan <ajs at crankycanuck.ca> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 12:52:49AM +0100, Dawid Kuroczko wrote:
>>>
>>> > For slony-I enabled database you will always get many rollbacks
>>> > a minute.
>>>
>>> > In short: slony's commiting instead of rolling back helps database
>>> > monitoring.
>>>
>>> If you don't collect baselines of your application for what is its 
>>> normal
>>> behaviour, I suggest your monitoring plan needs rework.  You still 
>>> ought to
>>> be able to see unusual numbers of rollbacks with the tool you want.  
>>> It just
>>> isn't "0".  But your baseline is whatever it is, and if your monitor 
>>> tool
>>> can't compare the current behavior to some arbitrary baseline, your 
>>> tool
>>> needs work.
>>
>> Of course my tool has a baseline.  The slaves have constant rate between
>> 39 to 41 rollbacks per minute.  The master calls issues ROLLBACK
>> between 45 and 60, with average of 50 per minute.  Alarm levels are set
>> accordingly.
>>
>> Now, the number of rollbacks on master is closely related to number of
>> DMLs issued (45-50 : quiet database) (60 -- DML load).
>>
>> But still I feel this is more like a workaround, especially that 
>> since 8.3.x
>> there should be no difference between commit and rollback for read-only
>> queries.  Or am I wrong?
>
> Which means that this might be an option for Slony-I version 2.0. I 
> will look over it.
When this version is announced to be delivered ?
>
>
> Jan
>

-- 
Cyril SCETBON