Re: Synchronization levels in SR

Tom Lane wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
>
>> It's pretty scary to call a user-defined function at that point in
>> transaction.
>>
>
> Not so much "pretty scary" as "zero chance of being accepted".
> And I do mean zero.
>

I swear, you guys are such buzzkills some days. I was suggesting a
model for building easy prototypes, and advocating a more formal way to
explain, in what could be code form, what someone means when they
suggest a particular quorum model or the like. Maybe all that will ever
be exposed into a production server are the best of the hand-written
implementations, and the scary "try your prototype here" hook only shows
up in debug builds, or never gets written at all. I did comment that I
expected faster built-in implementations to be the primary way these
would be handled.

From what Heikki said, it sounds like the main thing I was didn't
remember is to include some timestamp information to allow rules based
on that information too.

--
Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com www.2ndQuadrant.us