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

From Fujii Masao
Subject Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2
Date
Msg-id CAHGQGwEkuUe5XHkjWkK6hznBjVA+Kg_aNCxDA8iAZCVC+3j-9A@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2  (Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams@2ndQuadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 5:59 PM, Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> At 2016-04-04 17:28:07 +0900, masao.fujii@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> Barring any objections, I'll commit this patch.
>
> No objections, just a minor wording tweak:
>
> doc/src/sgml/config.sgml:
>
> "The synchronous standbys will be the standbys that their names appear
> early in this list" should be "The synchronous standbys will be those
> whose names appear earlier in this list".
>
> doc/src/sgml/high-availability.sgml:
>
> "The standbys that their names appear early in this list are given
> higher priority and will be considered as synchronous" should be "The
> standbys whose names appear earlier in the list are given higher
> priority and will be considered as synchronous".
>
> "The standbys that their names appear early in the list will be used as
> the synchronous standby" should be "The standbys whose names appear
> earlier in the list will be used as synchronous standbys".
>
> You may prefer to reword this in some other way, but the current "that
> their names appear" wording should be changed.

Thanks for the review! Will apply these comments to new patch.

Regards,

-- 
Fujii Masao



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Pavel Stehule
Date:
Subject: Re: raw output from copy
Next
From: Ashutosh Bapat
Date:
Subject: Re: Odd system-column handling in postgres_fdw join pushdown patch