Re: [HACKERS] Rename synchronous_standby_names?

[Kyotaro HORIGUCHI]

At Fri, 3 Jun 2016 10:52:31 +0200, Vik Fearing  wrote in 
<5751454f.6020...@2ndquadrant.fr>
> On 01/06/16 02:49, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 3:56 AM, David G. Johnston
> >  wrote:
> >> On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Peter Eisentraut
> >>  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 5/31/16 1:47 PM, Jaime Casanova wrote:
> 
>  Are we going to change synchronous_standby_names? Certainly the GUC is
>  not *only* a list of names anymore.
> 
>  synchronous_standby_config?
>  synchronous_standbys (adjust to correct english if necesary)?
> >>>
> >>> If the existing values are still going to be accepted, then I would leave
> >>> it as is.
> >>
> >> +1
> > 
> > +1. We've made quite a lot of deal to take an approach for the N-sync
> > that is 100% backward-compatible, it would be good to not break that
> > effort.

FWIW, +1 from me.

> We could always accept it like we do for archive/hot_standby->replica.
> 
> I like synchronous_standby_config, so I vote for changing it.

synchronous_standby_names is wantedly designed so as to accept
the old format. This is of couse for backward compatibility and
not to add new GUC variable needlessly.

And, I suppose that changing the domain of a GUC and changing
(only) the name of the varialbe is a bit different things and the
latter seems to me to have somewhat larger impact for users.

regards,

-- 
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center




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

Re: [HACKERS] Rename synchronous_standby_names?

[Robert Haas]

On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Peter Eisentraut
 wrote:
> On 5/31/16 1:47 PM, Jaime Casanova wrote:
>>
>> Are we going to change synchronous_standby_names? Certainly the GUC is
>> not *only* a list of names anymore.
>>
>> synchronous_standby_config?
>> synchronous_standbys (adjust to correct english if necesary)?
>
>
> If the existing values are still going to be accepted, then I would leave it
> as is.

+1, emphatically.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


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

Re: [HACKERS] Rename synchronous_standby_names?

[Vik Fearing]

On 01/06/16 02:49, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 3:56 AM, David G. Johnston
>  wrote:
>> On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Peter Eisentraut
>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> On 5/31/16 1:47 PM, Jaime Casanova wrote:

 Are we going to change synchronous_standby_names? Certainly the GUC is
 not *only* a list of names anymore.

 synchronous_standby_config?
 synchronous_standbys (adjust to correct english if necesary)?
>>>
>>> If the existing values are still going to be accepted, then I would leave
>>> it as is.
>>
>> +1
> 
> +1. We've made quite a lot of deal to take an approach for the N-sync
> that is 100% backward-compatible, it would be good to not break that
> effort.

We could always accept it like we do for archive/hot_standby->replica.

I like synchronous_standby_config, so I vote for changing it.
-- 
Vik Fearing  +33 6 46 75 15 36
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support


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

Re: [HACKERS] Rename synchronous_standby_names?

[Masahiko Sawada]

On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 9:49 AM, Michael Paquier
 wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 3:56 AM, David G. Johnston
>  wrote:
>> On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Peter Eisentraut
>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> On 5/31/16 1:47 PM, Jaime Casanova wrote:

 Are we going to change synchronous_standby_names? Certainly the GUC is
 not *only* a list of names anymore.

 synchronous_standby_config?
 synchronous_standbys (adjust to correct english if necesary)?
>>>
>>>
>>> If the existing values are still going to be accepted, then I would leave
>>> it as is.
>>
>>
>> +1
>
> +1. We've made quite a lot of deal to take an approach for the N-sync
> that is 100% backward-compatible, it would be good to not break that
> effort.

+1

-- 
Regards,

--
Masahiko Sawada


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

Re: [HACKERS] Rename synchronous_standby_names?

[Michael Paquier]

On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 3:56 AM, David G. Johnston
 wrote:
> On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Peter Eisentraut
>  wrote:
>>
>> On 5/31/16 1:47 PM, Jaime Casanova wrote:
>>>
>>> Are we going to change synchronous_standby_names? Certainly the GUC is
>>> not *only* a list of names anymore.
>>>
>>> synchronous_standby_config?
>>> synchronous_standbys (adjust to correct english if necesary)?
>>
>>
>> If the existing values are still going to be accepted, then I would leave
>> it as is.
>
>
> +1

+1. We've made quite a lot of deal to take an approach for the N-sync
that is 100% backward-compatible, it would be good to not break that
effort.
-- 
Michael


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

Re: [HACKERS] Rename synchronous_standby_names?

[David G. Johnston]

On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Peter Eisentraut <
peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:

> On 5/31/16 1:47 PM, Jaime Casanova wrote:
>
>> Are we going to change synchronous_standby_names? Certainly the GUC is
>> not *only* a list of names anymore.
>>
>> synchronous_standby_config?
>> synchronous_standbys (adjust to correct english if necesary)?
>>
>
> If the existing values are still going to be accepted, then I would leave
> it as is.


​+1
​
David J.

Re: [HACKERS] Rename synchronous_standby_names?

[Peter Eisentraut]

On 5/31/16 1:47 PM, Jaime Casanova wrote:

Are we going to change synchronous_standby_names? Certainly the GUC is
not *only* a list of names anymore.

synchronous_standby_config?
synchronous_standbys (adjust to correct english if necesary)?


If the existing values are still going to be accepted, then I would 
leave it as is.


--
Peter Eisentraut  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services


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

Re: [HACKERS] Rename synchronous_standby_names?

[Tom Lane]

Jaime Casanova  writes:
> Are we going to change synchronous_standby_names? Certainly the GUC is
> not *only* a list of names anymore.

> synchronous_standby_config?
> synchronous_standbys (adjust to correct english if necesary)?

I could get behind renaming it to synchronous_standby_config ...

regards, tom lane


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