Re: New standby_slot_names GUC in PG 17

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Muhammad Ikram
Тема Re: New standby_slot_names GUC in PG 17
Дата
Msg-id CAGeimVpZQaGAq408noGytjizgeCWduuLv1bzLtXV0tSEqdVNoQ@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: New standby_slot_names GUC in PG 17  (Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: New standby_slot_names GUC in PG 17
Список pgsql-hackers
Дерево обсуждения
Hi,

A humble input, as on primary we have #primary_slot_name = ''  then should not it be okay to have standby_slot_names or standby_slot_name ? It seems  consistent with the Guc on primary.

Another suggestion is standby_replication_slots.

Regards,
Muhammad Ikram
Bitnine Global.

On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 8:47 PM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 11:37:54AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> The release notes have this item:
>
>       Allow specification of physical standbys that must be synchronized
>       before they are visible to subscribers (Hou Zhijie, Shveta Malik)
>
>       The new server variable is standby_slot_names.
>
> Is standby_slot_names an accurate name for this GUC?  It seems too
> generic.

+1, I was considering bringing this up, too.  I'm still thinking of
alternate names to propose, though.

--
nathan




--
Muhammad Ikram

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: suspicious valgrind reports about radixtree/tidstore on arm64
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Small LO_BUFSIZE slows down lo_import and lo_export in libpq