From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication. |
Date: | 2016-08-03 06:05:20 |
Message-ID: | CAB7nPqTrXrfrhNVJYcyB2r-6ZVnAzsHbf9_6ZCfi+EnkHeTYwg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 2:52 PM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I was thinking that the syntax for quorum method would use '[ ... ]'
> but it will be confused with '( ... )' priority method used.
> 001 patch adds 'Any N ( ... )' style syntax but I know that we still
> might need to discuss about better syntax, discussion is very welcome.
> Attached draft patch, please give me feedback.
I am +1 for using either "{}" or "[]" to define a quorum set, and -1
for the addition of a keyword in front of the integer defining for how
many nodes server need to wait for.
- foreach(cell, sync_standbys)
+ foreach (cell, sync_standbys)
{
- WalSnd *walsnd = &WalSndCtl->walsnds[lfirst_int(cell)];
+ WalSnd *walsnd = &WalSndCtl->walsnds[lfirst_int(cell)];
This patch has some noise.
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-08-03 06:08:58 | Re: Way to access LSN (for each transaction) by directly talking to postgres? |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-08-03 06:00:00 | Re: Way to access LSN (for each transaction) by directly talking to postgres? |