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
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? |