Re: Review of Refactoring code for sync node detection

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Jim Nasby <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Review of Refactoring code for sync node detection
Date: 2014-11-17 13:00:30
Message-ID: CA+U5nMKAdt7UConztCcNeTWE5XVO5DGY-bditJnmm_5u_u0CvQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 16 November 2014 12:07, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> Let's work
> the multiple node thing once we have a better spec of how to do it,
> visibly using a dedicated micro-language within s_s_names.

Hmm, please make sure that is a new post. That is easily something I
could disagree with, even though I support the need for more
functionality.

--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2014-11-17 13:09:36 Re: Review of Refactoring code for sync node detection
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2014-11-17 11:11:05 Re: WAL format and API changes (9.5)