On 01/10/2014 04:48 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:

On 01/10/2014 04:38 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:

* Adrian Klaver (adrian.kla...@gmail.com) wrote:
On 01/10/2014 04:25 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
* Adrian Klaver (adrian.kla...@gmail.com) wrote:
A) Change the existing sync mode to allow the master and standby
fall out of sync should a standby fall over.

I'm not sure that anyone is argueing for this..

Looks like here, unless I am really missing the point:

Elsewhere in the thread, JD agreed that having it as an independent
option was fine.

Yes. I am fine with an independent option.

I missed that. What confused me and seems to be generally confusing is the overloading of the term sync:

"Proposed behavior:

db01->sync->db02 "

In my mind if that is an independent option it should have different name. I propose Schrödinger:)


Adrian Klaver

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to