On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 1:18 PM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 06:18:30PM +0300, Maksim Milyutin wrote:
> > I have noticed that in description of *flush_lag* in pg_stat_replication
> > view (https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/monitoring-stats.html#PG-STAT-REPLICATION-VIEW)
> > there exists unknown value of synchronous_commit parameter - *remote_flush*.
> > I think it was meant to use the value *on*.
>
> Yes, you are right. It should be "on" as "remote_flush" is not a valid
> value. remote_flush is listed in SyncCommitLevel though, so this makes
> me wonder if we should also introduce a new value for this purpose
> available for users. The fix you propose looks good to me. Any
> opinions from others?
+1 for the patch.
As for introducing remote_flush as the true name of the level, this
was discussed but somehow went off-course and never made it to the
finish line:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAEepm%3D3FFaanSS4sugG%2BApzq2tCVjEYCO2wOQBod2d7GWb%3DDvA%40mail.gmail.com
--
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com