Re: synchronous_standby_names with '*' - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Alexander Perepelica
Subject Re: synchronous_standby_names with '*'
Date
Msg-id CAAXZ8mc4rr8uQoeQ+QgajDuA_1PuVgBMdJe_u8c1n-c_ToSEMw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to synchronous_standby_names with '*'  (alexondi <alexondi@rambler.ru>)
List pgsql-general
I think if master has not slave's at this time then server must use "local" mode. But if he has >=1 slave then he must wait until slave accept transaction. And "synchronous_standby_names" select behaviour about how master shoud select which slave must be synchronous or not. And when this GUC is '*' master should use first in the list IMHO.
In docs you (developers) write

PostgreSQL does not provide the system software required to identify a failure on the primary and notify the standby database server.

But I think you don't have provide software to identify AND standby failure (only notification about this situation's) - and this master without slave  is this failure (slave don't started)

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Misa Simic
Date:
Subject: UUID datatype and GIST index support
Next
From: Alexander Perepelica
Date:
Subject: Re: synchronous_standby_names with '*'