Horton

Re: Sync Rep v17

Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com>

View thread
From: "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>
To: Kevin Grittner <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>, Daniel Farina <daniel@heroku.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2011-03-02T20:36:48Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 14:26 -0600, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>  
> > All I'm saying is that if we end up shipping without that
> > parameter (implying allow_standalone_primary=on), we need to call
> > the feature something else. The GUCs and code can probably stay as
> > it is, but we shouldn't use the term "synchronous replication" in
> > the documentation, and release notes and such.
>  
> I think including "synchronous" is OK as long as it's properly
> qualified.  Off-hand thoughts in no particular order:
>  
> semi-synchronous 

You mean asynchronous

> conditionally synchronous

You mean asynchronous

JD




-- 
PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor
Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 509.416.6579
Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering
http://twitter.com/cmdpromptinc | http://identi.ca/commandprompt