| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(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 05:20:02 |
| Message-ID: | CAB7nPqR-v_hWgiTGvtOA=tRNoz3zLEM4CgSHdn9yheuGFLXtyw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 9:07 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I'll send an updated patch tomorrow.
Here are updated versions. I divided the patch into two for clarity,
the first one is the actual refactoring patch, renaming
SyncRepGetSynchronousNode to SyncRepGetSynchronousStandby (+alpha,
like updating synchronous to sync in the comments as you mentioned)
such as the namings have no conflicts.
The second one updates the syncrep code, including WAL sender and WAL
receiver, and its surroundings to use the term "node" instead of
"standby". This brings in the code the idea that a node using
replication APIs is not necessarily a standby, making it more generic.
This can be applied on top of the refactoring patch. If any other
folks (Heikki or Fujii-san?) have comments about this idea feel free.
Regards,
--
Michael
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| 0001-Refactor-code-to-detect-synchronous-node-in-WAL-send.patch | text/x-patch | 7.5 KB |
| 0002-Replace-concept-of-standby-by-node-in-replication-co.patch | text/x-patch | 39.6 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rajeev rastogi | 2014-11-17 05:49:06 | Re: Index scan optimization |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2014-11-17 04:13:22 | Re: BRIN indexes - TRAP: BadArgument |