Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
Subject Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2
Date
Msg-id 20160405.192305.57944288.horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2  (Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2  (Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
At Mon, 4 Apr 2016 22:00:24 +0900, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote in
<CAD21AoDoq1ubY4KkKhrA9jzaVXekwAT7gV5pQJbS+wj98b9-3A@mail.gmail.com>
> > For this case, the tree members of SyncRepConfig are '2[Sby1,',
> > 'Sby2', "Sby3]'. This syntax is valid for the current
> > specification but will surely get different meaning by the future
> > changes. We should refuse this known-to-be-wrong-in-future syntax
> > from now.
> 
> I couldn't get your point but why will the above syntax meaning be
> different from current meaning by future change?
> I thought that another method uses another kind of parentheses.

If the 'another kind of parehtheses' is a pair of brackets, an
application_name 'tokyo[A]', for example, is currently allowed to
occur unquoted in the list but will become disallowed by the
syntax change.


regards,

-- 
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center





pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Fujii Masao
Date:
Subject: Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2
Next
From: Fujii Masao
Date:
Subject: Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2