On 8/8/07, Christopher Browne <cbbrowne at ca.afilias.info> wrote:
> Most of this seems fine; fixes consistency between defaults and what is
> documented.
>
> I don't agree with the explanation about the "race condition;" I don't
> think that represents a race condition at all.  The timeout value is not
> germane to the things described; if is set higher or lower, that will
> not lead to data being replicated improperly.
>
> The reason for having sync_interval_timeout isn't to avoid a race
> condition - it is to provide a way to say, with some confidence, "We
> have replicated this origin up to Time T" even when there have been no
> recent updates coming in from the application.
>
> I have reworded this, and committed it to 1.2 and HEAD...
>
> http://lists.slony.info/pipermail/slony1-commit/2007-August/001911.html

Thanks, the updated wording is good. So just to be clear, there is no
race condition with sequences as (they used to be) described and it
would be entirely possible to disable sync_interval_timeout and never
miss data?

-Dave