HA-JDBC quiesces all connections during activate/synchronize? I think you mentioned that before, but would it be technically possible to allow read-only connections to go through during quiesce/synchronize/activate?
I cannot think of anything technical that blocks such a feature, so my only question is sizing the time and effort to do such a thing. I assume feasibility depends on how granular the current code does locking during quiesce/activate/synchronize.
If it is a big change I would not worry about it. The question only came up in the context of synchronizing large databases that are inactive for a few seconds or minutes. Snapshot/restore is great, but slower than DifferentialSynchronizationStrategy, slower than database trigger strategies you mentioned in the past, and slower than journal-style synchronization strategies I mentioned.
This is more of a curiosity question.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
HA-JDBC quiesces all connections during activate/synchronize? I think you mentioned that before, but would it be technically possible to allow read-only connections to go through during quiesce/synchronize/activate?
I cannot think of anything technical that blocks such a feature, so my only question is sizing the time and effort to do such a thing. I assume feasibility depends on how granular the current code does locking during quiesce/activate/synchronize.
If it is a big change I would not worry about it. The question only came up in the context of synchronizing large databases that are inactive for a few seconds or minutes. Snapshot/restore is great, but slower than DifferentialSynchronizationStrategy, slower than database trigger strategies you mentioned in the past, and slower than journal-style synchronization strategies I mentioned.
This is more of a curiosity question.