On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 10:20 AM Greg Stark <st...@mit.edu> wrote: > > This doesn't seem to be getting any further attention. It sounds like > Julien didn't agree with the scope of the text. Bharath do you think > Julien's comments make sense? Will you have a chance to look at this?
Thanks Greg. I was busy with other features. Thanks Julien for the off-list discussion. I tried to address review comments in the v3 patch attached. Now, I've added the notes in high-availability.sgml which sort of suits more and closer to physical replicatioin than contrib.sgml or extend.sgml. Thoughts? Regards, Bharath Rupireddy.
v3-0001-Document-configuring-an-external-module-in-physic.patch
Description: Binary data
