Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2

From: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com
Cc: sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com, thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com, michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com, robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com, thom(at)linux(dot)com, memissemerson(at)gmail(dot)com, josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com, amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2
Date: 2016-04-06 08:16:12
Message-ID: 20160406.171612.81865787.horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Sorry, my code was wrong in the case that the total numer of
synchronous standby exceeds required number and the wansender is
at priority 1.

Sorry for the noise.

At Wed, 06 Apr 2016 17:01:51 +0900 (Tokyo Standard Time), Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote in <20160406(dot)170151(dot)246853881(dot)horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
> You must misread the patch. am_sync is originally set in the loop
> just after that for the case.

regards,

--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2016-04-06 08:18:54 Re: pgsql: Avoid archiving XLOG_RUNNING_XACTS on idle server
Previous Message Fujii Masao 2016-04-06 08:10:12 Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2