Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2

From: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, Beena Emerson <memissemerson(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2
Date: 2016-03-03 19:37:24
Message-ID: CAEepm=2ubiu2tWBXgfeiDJuiBnzUtDbdmkE+0PSbn4MzopYfJQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 7:40 AM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Previous patch has bug around GUC parameter handling.
> Attached updated version.

I spotted a couple of typos:

+ used. Priority is given to servers in the order that the appear
in the list.

s/the appear/they appear/

- The minimum wait time is the roundtrip time between primary to standby.
+ The minimum wait time is the roundtrip time between the primary and the
+ almost synchronous standby.

s/almost/slowest/

--
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kevin Grittner 2016-03-03 19:40:50 Re: snapshot too old, configured by time
Previous Message Fabien COELHO 2016-03-03 19:35:29 Re: pgbench small bug fix