Re: DRAFT 9.6 release - Mailing list pgsql-advocacy

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: DRAFT 9.6 release
Date
Msg-id CAB7nPqTFZH=13d+t8rx4e33PRAFofMM4eKZfPAaePQkU5ucwuw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: DRAFT 9.6 release  (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>)
List pgsql-advocacy
On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:
> On 08/30/2016 06:39 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 10:35 AM, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:
>>> ??? It's always been possible for me to give multiple standbys the same
>>> name, making a de-facto group.
>>
>> A "group" grammar, by that I mean an alias referring to a set of
>> nodes, is not supported. And you can still define multiple entries
>> with the same name.
>>
>
> Yeah, so what happens in the case I described?  Is the master just
> looking for that number of commits, or is it looking for a commit from
> g1 and from g2?

How do you set up synchronous_standby_names in this case? Are multiple
nodes using the same application_name, being either 'g1' or 'g2'?
--
Michael


pgsql-advocacy by date:

Previous
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: DRAFT 9.6 release
Next
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: DRAFT 9.6 release