| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Inconsistency between postgresql.conf and docs |
| Date: | 2011-06-29 16:34:54 |
| Message-ID: | 4E0B542E.606@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> I don't have a strong feeling on whether or not we should put that
> setting in its own section. Right now, we only have one setting for
> synchronous replication, so I guess maybe it depends on if we think
> there will be more in the future.
I believe there will be more in the future. However, given that the
replication section isn't exactly overpopulated, I think we could
consolidate.
My preference would be to have:
# REPLICATION
# - Master Settings -
# these settings affect the master role in replication
# they will be ignored on the standby
... settings ...
# - Standby Settings -
# these settings affect the standby role in replication
# they will be ignored on the master
... settings ...
That's how I've been setting up the file for my customers; it's fairly
clear and understandable.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2011-06-29 16:51:20 | Re: Re: starting to review the Extend NOT NULL representation to pg_constraint patch |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-06-29 16:34:06 | Re: Range Types, constructors, and the type system |