On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 5:08 PM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 1:17 PM, Michael Paquier > <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 10:10 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: >>> By the discussions so far, I'm planning to have several replication >>> methods such as 'quorum', 'complex' in the feature, and the each >>> replication method specifies the syntax of s_s_names. >>> It means that s_s_names could have the number of sync standbys like >>> what current patch does. >> >> What if the application_name of a standby node has the format of an integer? > > Even if the standby has an integer as application_name, we can set > s_s_names like '2,1,2,3'. > The leading '2' is always handled as the number of sync standbys when > s_r_method = 'priority'.
Hm. I agree with Fujii-san here, having the number of sync standbys defined in a parameter that should have a list of names is a bit confusing. I'd rather have a separate GUC, which brings us back to one of the first patches that I came up with, and a couple of people, including Josh were not happy with that because this did not support real quorum. Perhaps the final answer would be really to get a set of hooks, and a contrib module making use of that. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
