Re: Sync Rep Design

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)postgresql(dot)org>
To: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Sync Rep Design
Date: 2011-01-04 22:18:13
Message-ID: 4D239CA5.70504@postgresql.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> What about the HBA here?

Hmmm. That's tempting; an "synchronous" HBA instead of a GUC? But that
doesn't solve the problem of "standby #6 is failing, I want to kick it
off synch rep".

I'd be opposed to having a GUC *and* an HBA. making DBAs set things
independantly in two places just frustrates our users.

--Josh

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dimitri Fontaine 2011-01-04 22:24:43 Re: Sync Rep Design
Previous Message Dimitri Fontaine 2011-01-04 22:00:53 Re: Sync Rep Design