Re: [HACKERS] invalid number of sync standbys in synchronous_standby_names

On Sat, Dec 17, 2016 at 1:00 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Fujii Masao writes: >> When the number of sync standbys is set to 0 in s_s_names, the assersion >> failure happens as follows. This means that current multiple syncrep code >> assumes that the num of

Re: [HACKERS] invalid number of sync standbys in synchronous_standby_names

Fujii Masao writes: > When the number of sync standbys is set to 0 in s_s_names, the assersion > failure happens as follows. This means that current multiple syncrep code > assumes that the num of sync standbys must be greater than 0. But we forgot > to forbid users from

[HACKERS] invalid number of sync standbys in synchronous_standby_names

Hi, When the number of sync standbys is set to 0 in s_s_names, the assersion failure happens as follows. This means that current multiple syncrep code assumes that the num of sync standbys must be greater than 0. But we forgot to forbid users from setting that num to 0. This is an oversight in