| From: | Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: synchronous_commit = remote_flush |
| Date: | 2016-08-21 12:16:31 |
| Message-ID: | 20160821121630.vz6pvnkbokpemfk5@msg.df7cb.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Re: Thomas Munro 2016-08-21 <CAEepm=0EQvwhFih7wZ+cHL=UJDvF4KSe0thw1gPEY-ga3DcvmQ(at)mail(dot)gmail(dot)com>
> Right, we could just add it to guc.c after "on", so that you can "SET
> synchronous_commit TO remote_flush", but then "SHOW
> synchronous_commit" returns "on".
>
> The problem I was thinking about was this: if you add "remote_flush"
> before "on" in guc.c, then "SHOW ..." will return "remote_flush",
> which would be really helpful for users trying to understand what
> syncrep is actually doing; but it would probably confuse single node
> users and async replication users.
Maybe "flush" would work, given it applies locally and on the remote
side? (And "local" could be "local_flush"...?)
Christoph
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Emre Hasegeli | 2016-08-21 13:49:16 | Re: [PATCH] Alter or rename enum value |
| Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2016-08-21 10:35:33 | Re: synchronous_commit = remote_flush |