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

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2
Date
Msg-id CAB7nPqRxhoz61LLFifJLAox6ixoU0a23i9vaGGzGocT3vJ5KPw@mail.gmail.com
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  (Beena Emerson <memissemerson@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 2:57 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 2:16 PM, Beena Emerson wrote:
>> Since there will not be many nesting and grouping, I still prefer new
>> language to JSON.
>> I understand one can easily, modify/add groups in JSON using in built
>> functions but I think changes will not be done too often.
>>
>
> If we decided to use dedicated language, the syntax checker for that
> language is needed, via SQL or something.

Well, sure, both approaches have downsides.

> Otherwise we will not be able to know whether the parsing that value
> will be done correctly, until reloading or restarting server.

And this is the case of any format as well. String format validation
for a GUC occurs when server is reloaded or restarted, one advantage
of JSON is that the parser validator is already here, so we don't need
to reinvent a new machinery for that.
-- 
Michael



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Masahiko Sawada
Date:
Subject: Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2
Next
From: Beena Emerson
Date:
Subject: Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2