On 02.03.2011 12:40, Simon Riggs wrote:
> allow_standalone_primary seems to need to be better through than it is
> now, yet neither of us think its worth having.
>
> If the people that want it can think it through a little better then it
> might make this release, but I propose to remove it from this current
> patch to allow us to commit with greater certainty and fewer bugs.
If you leave it out, then let's rename the feature to "semi-synchronous
replication" or such. The point of synchronous replication is
zero-data-loss, and you don't achieve that with allow_standalone_primary=on.
-- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com