From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)berkus(dot)org>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Vik Fearing <vik(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication. |
Date: | 2017-08-17 05:13:14 |
Message-ID: | CAB7nPqRAFo8Mq-o2BHaut6ZqREGegNhfRd7Q+VQq1jZZU0o0sw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 2:08 PM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Michael Paquier
> <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 4:24 PM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> FWIW, in my opinion if tte current behavior of 'N(a,b)' could confuse
>>> users and we want to break the backward compatibility, I'd rather like
>>> to remove that style in PostgreSQL 10 and to raise an syntax error to
>>> user for more safety. Also, since the syntax 'a, b' might be opaque
>>> for new users who don't know the history of s_s_names syntax, we could
>>> unify its syntax to '[ANY|FIRST] N (a, b, ...)' syntax while keeping
>>> the '*'.
>>
>> I find the removal of a syntax in release N for something introduced
>> in release (N - 1) a bit hard to swallow from the user prospective.
>> What about just issuing a warning instead and say that the use of
>> ANY/FIRST is recommended? It costs nothing in maintenance to keep it
>> around.
>
> Yeah, I think that would be better. If we decide to not make quorum
> commit the default we can issue a warning in docs. Attached a draft
> patch.
I had in mind a ereport(WARNING) in create_syncrep_config. Extra
thoughts/opinions welcome.
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Langote | 2017-08-17 05:24:14 | Re: expanding inheritance in partition bound order |
Previous Message | Chris Travers | 2017-08-17 05:09:24 | Re: Orphaned files in base/[oid] |