On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 2:08 PM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Michael Paquier > <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 4:24 PM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> FWIW, in my opinion if tte current behavior of 'N(a,b)' could confuse >>> users and we want to break the backward compatibility, I'd rather like >>> to remove that style in PostgreSQL 10 and to raise an syntax error to >>> user for more safety. Also, since the syntax 'a, b' might be opaque >>> for new users who don't know the history of s_s_names syntax, we could >>> unify its syntax to '[ANY|FIRST] N (a, b, ...)' syntax while keeping >>> the '*'. >> >> I find the removal of a syntax in release N for something introduced >> in release (N - 1) a bit hard to swallow from the user prospective. >> What about just issuing a warning instead and say that the use of >> ANY/FIRST is recommended? It costs nothing in maintenance to keep it >> around. > > Yeah, I think that would be better. If we decide to not make quorum > commit the default we can issue a warning in docs. Attached a draft > patch.
I had in mind a ereport(WARNING) in create_syncrep_config. Extra thoughts/opinions welcome. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
