| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: libpq changes for synchronous replication |
| Date: | 2010-11-19 15:25:13 |
| Message-ID: | 29581.1290180313@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 7:43 AM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> The patch is touching protocol.sgml as follows. Isn't this enough?
> How about some updates to the "Message Flow" section, especially the
> section on "COPY Operations"?
Yeah. You're adding a new fundamental state to the protocol; it's not
enough to bury that in the description of a message format. I don't
think a whole lot of new verbiage is needed, but the COPY section needs
to point out that this is a different state that allows both send and
receive, and explain what the conditions are for getting into and out of
that state.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-11-19 15:36:06 | Re: Latches with weak memory ordering (Re: max_wal_senders must die) |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2010-11-19 15:22:31 | Re: duplicate connection failure messages |