Re: synchronized_standby_slots behavior inconsistent with quorum-based synchronous replication

On Wed, Mar 18, 2026 at 10:38 AM shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2026 at 10:15 AM Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > > 8)
> > > I would like to understand how synchronous_standby_names deal with
> > > such a case: 'first as server name or FIRST as priority syntax'. I
> > > could not find any such function/logic there.
> > >
>
> Let me know if you understand this part, else I will debug it once.
>

This is not needed for synchronous_standby_names because specifying a
list of values without the FIRST/ANY keyword is implicitly treated as
FIRST 1, which the syncrep parser already handles. However, this
behavior differs for synchronized_standby_slots, where a list of
values without FIRST/ANY is treated as ALL mode. Since we reuse the
syncrep parser here, we need to distinguish whether the FIRST keyword
was explicitly provided by the user, which is the purpose of the
IsExplicitFirstSyncStandbySlotsSyntax function.

--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.