Re: s/recovery_connections/allow_standby_queries/, or something like that?

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: s/recovery_connections/allow_standby_queries/, or something like that?
Date: 2010-04-29 17:55:35
Message-ID: 1272563735.2733.14.camel@jd-desktop.unknown.charter.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, 2010-04-29 at 13:18 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I've just realized that one of the confusing things about this debate
> is that the recovery_connections parameter is very confusingly named.
> It might have been okay when HS existed in isolation, but with SR in the
> mix, it's not at all clear that the parameter refers to client
> connections made to a standby server, and not to replication connections
> made from a standby to its master. It is easy to think that this is a
> parameter that needs to be turned on in the master to allow standby
> slaves to connect to it.
>
> Another problem is that it looks more like an integer parameter
> (ie, maximum number of such connections) than a boolean.
>
> I think a different name would help. The best idea I can come up with
> on the spur of the moment is "allow_standby_queries", but I'm not sure
> that can't be improved on. Comments?

enable_standby_queries (nitpicky but it seems more appropriate)

Joshua D. Drake

>
> regards, tom lane
>

--
PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor
Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 503.667.4564
Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2010-04-29 17:57:23 Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make CheckRequiredParameterValues() depend upon correct
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-04-29 17:49:15 Re: s/recovery_connections/allow_standby_queries/, or something like that?