> I don't think that it's good idea to control that behavior by using
> --status-interval. I'm sure that there are some users who both want that
> behavior and want set the maximum interval between a feedback is sent
> back to the server because these settings are available in walreceiver.
> But your version of --status-interval doesn't allow those settings at
> all. That is, if set to -1, the maximum interval between each feedback
> cannot be set. OTOH, if set to the positive number,
> feedback-as-soon-as-fsync behavior cannot be enabled. Therefore, I'm
> thinking that it's better to introduce new separate option for that
> behavior.
Thanks for the review!
This patch was split option as you pointed out.
If -r option is specified, status packets sent to server as soon as after fsync.
Otherwise to send server status packet in the spacing of the --status-interval.
Regards,
--
Furuya Osamu
