Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 15:50 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > >> I assumed that when Simon was talking about removing >> allow_standalone_primary, he meant making the code always behave >> as if it were turned OFF. > > That is the part that is currently not fully specified, so no that > is not currently included in the patch. > > That isn't double-talk for "and I will not include it". > > What I mean is I'd rather have something than nothing, whatever we > decide to call it. +1 on that. > But the people that want it had better come up with a clear > definition of how it will actually work What is ill-defined? I would have thought that the commit request would hang indefinitely until the server was able to provide its usual guarantees. I'm not clear on what cases aren't covered by that. -Kevin
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
