On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 5:50 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> I agree. I assumed that when Simon was talking about removing
> allow_standalone_primary, he meant making the code always behave as if
> it were turned OFF.
I feel the same thing.. Despite his saying, the patch implements
sync_replication_timeout_client, and if its value is too large,
the primary behaves like "wait-forever". Though the primary
behaves like "standalone" only when it's started first without
connected standbys. So if we have
sync_replication_timeout_client, allow_standalone_primary
looks no longer useful.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
