Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Beena Emerson <memissemerson(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2
Date: 2015-07-01 14:45:36
Message-ID: 5593FD10.5030706@gmx.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 6/26/15 1:46 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> - k(elt1,elt2,eltN) means that we need for the k elements in the set
> to return true (aka commit confirmation).
> - k[elt1,elt2,eltN] means that we need for the first k elements in the
> set to return true.

I think the difference between (...) and [...] is not intuitive. To me,
{...} would be more intuitive to indicate order does not matter.

> When k is not defined for a group, k = 1.

How about putting it at the end? Like

[foo,bar,baz](2)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2015-07-01 14:47:52 Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2015-07-01 14:39:23 Re: drop/truncate table sucks for large values of shared buffers