Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, 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>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(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 09:26:41
Message-ID: 20160405092641.2yz6xfsulk2o6rwa@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2016-04-05 10:13:50 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> The lack of per-database settings is not a blocker for me.

Just to clarify: Neither is it for me.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Oleksii Kliukin 2016-04-05 09:39:53 Re: Timeline following for logical slots
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2016-04-05 09:19:14 Re: Yet another small patch - reorderbuffer.c:1099