| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, Beena Emerson <memissemerson(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2 |
| Date: | 2016-04-05 14:47:45 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoaL35mUQBu5+9zKCNeSL-vfXn=Q0oict579epBKcVRQWw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 4:28 AM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> + ereport(LOG,
>>> + (errmsg("standby \"%s\" is now the synchronous standby with priority %u",
>>> + application_name, MyWalSnd->sync_standby_priority)));
>>>
>>> s/ the / a /
>
> I have no objection to this change itself. But we have used this message
> in 9.5 or before, so if we apply this change, probably we need
> back-patching.
"the" implies that there can be only one synchronous standby at that
priority, while "a" implies that there could be more than one. So the
situation might be different with this patch than previously. (I
haven't read the patch so I don't know whether this is actually true,
but it might be what Thomas was going for.)
Also, I'd like to associate myself with the general happiness about
the prospect of having this feature in 9.6 (but without specifically
endorsing the code, since I have not read it).
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Anastasia Lubennikova | 2016-04-05 14:56:54 | Re: WIP: Covering + unique indexes. |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2016-04-05 14:45:03 | Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics |