Re: synchronized_standby_slots behavior inconsistent with quorum-based synchronous replication

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Hou, Zhijie/侯 志杰 <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ajin Cherian <itsajin(at)gmail(dot)com>, SATYANARAYANA NARLAPURAM <satyanarlapuram(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: synchronized_standby_slots behavior inconsistent with quorum-based synchronous replication
Date: 2026-04-14 11:25:58
Message-ID: CAA4eK1JFxJPHLaT3Lmk+rEv3aEOZeBz2HCWbe2cmAPhJUA-rvQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Apr 14, 2026 at 4:26 PM Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hou-san's suggestion to update the common syncrep parser logic for the
> second patch is not included for now. I'll wait to hear from Amit and
> others before deciding whether to incorporate it.
>

The idea was to keep it as a 0003 patch atop 0002. That will help to
evaluate both your and Hou-San's approaches.

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message vignesh C 2026-04-14 11:31:07 Re: Support EXCEPT for TABLES IN SCHEMA publications
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2026-04-14 11:21:30 Re: [PATCH] GROUP BY ALL