On 09/05/2014 08:51 AM, furu...@pm.nttdata.co.jp wrote:
Thanks for the review!
I understand the attention message wasn't appropriate.
To report the write location, even If you do not specify a replication
slot.
So the fix only appended messages.
There was a description of the flush location section of '-S' option,
but I intended to catch eye more and added a message.
Is it better to make specification of the -S option indispensable?
The patch cannot be applied to HEAD cleanly. Could you update the patch?
Thank you for pointing out.
Updated the patch.
I don't understand what this patch does. When would you want to use the
new --reply-fsync option? Is there any reason *not* to use it? In other
words, do we need an option for this, couldn't you just always send the
feedback message after fsync?
- Heikki
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
