Re: standby registration (was: is sync rep stalled?)

On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 12:26 PM, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> Now, the more relevant question, what I actually need in order for a Sync
> Rep feature in 9.1 to be useful to the people who want it most I talk to.
>  That would be a simple to configure setup where I list a subset of
> "important" nodes, and the appropriate acknowledgement level I want to hear
> from one of them.  And when one of those nodes gives that acknowledgement,
> commit on the master happens too.  That's it.  For use cases like the
> commonly discussed "two local/two remote" situation, the two remote ones
> would be listed as the important ones.

That sounds fine to me. How do the details work? Each slave
publishes a name to the master via a recovery.conf parameter, and the
master has a GUC listing the names of the important slaves?

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company