Re: Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication. - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Masahiko Sawada
Subject Re: Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.
Date
Msg-id CAD21AoCoxnD+=kZAJ68H9RMEsVNZqc9BCo92oFq3F=61J+i-sA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 3:05 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 2:52 PM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I was thinking that the syntax for quorum method would use '[ ... ]'
>> but it will be confused with '( ... )' priority method used.
>> 001 patch adds 'Any N ( ... )' style syntax but I know that we still
>> might need to discuss about better syntax, discussion is very welcome.
>> Attached draft patch, please give me feedback.
>
> I am +1 for using either "{}" or "[]" to define a quorum set, and -1
> for the addition of a keyword in front of the integer defining for how
> many nodes server need to wait for.

Thank you for reply.
"{}" or "[]" are not bad but because these are not intuitive, I
thought that it will be hard for uses to use different method for each
purpose.

> -    foreach(cell, sync_standbys)
> +    foreach (cell, sync_standbys)
>      {
> -        WalSnd       *walsnd = &WalSndCtl->walsnds[lfirst_int(cell)];
> +        WalSnd *walsnd = &WalSndCtl->walsnds[lfirst_int(cell)];
> This patch has some noise.

Will fix.

-- 
Regards,

--
Masahiko Sawada



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Noah Misch
Date:
Subject: Re: max_parallel_degree > 0 for 9.6 beta
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: New version numbering practices