| From: | Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Vik Fearing <vik(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication. |
| Date: | 2016-09-09 08:43:08 |
| Message-ID: | 036fcf3c-a9a3-4365-2c76-69c8e9ed5061@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 09/09/16 08:23, Vik Fearing wrote:
> On 09/09/2016 03:28 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 6:26 PM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> "k (n1, n2, n3)" == "first k (n1, n2, n3)" doesn't break backward
>>> compatibility but most users would think "k(n1, n2, n3)" as quorum
>>> after introduced quorum.
>>> I wish we can change the s_s_names syntax of 9.6 to "first k(n1, n2,
>>> n3)" style before 9.6 releasing if we got consensus.
>>
>> Considering breaking backward-compatibility in the next release does
>> not sound like a good idea to me for a new feature that is going to be
>> GA soon.
>
> Indeed. I'll vote for pulling a fast one on 9.6 for this.
>
+1
--
Petr Jelinek http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum | 2016-09-09 08:48:50 | Re: to_date_valid() |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2016-09-09 08:35:22 | Re: patch: function xmltable |