Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> What's wrong with synchronous_commit? It's accurate and simple.
>
> That is fine too.
My concern would be that it can be read two ways:
1. When you commit, sync (something or other - unspecified)
2. Synchronise commits (to each other? to something else?)*
It's obvious to people on the -hackers list what we're talking about,
but is it so clear to a newbie, perhaps non-English speaker?
* I can see people thinking this means something like "commit_delay".
-- Richard Huxton Archonet Ltd
