On 21.06.24 17:37, Bruce Momjian wrote:
The release notes have this item:Allow specification of physical standbys that must be synchronized before they are visible to subscribers (Hou Zhijie, Shveta Malik) The new server variable is standby_slot_names. Is standby_slot_names an accurate name for this GUC? It seems too generic.
This was possibly inspired by pg_failover_slots.standby_slot_names (which in turn came from pglogical.standby_slot_names). In those cases, you have some more context from the extension prefix.
The new suggested names sound good to me.
