On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 14:24, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On Fri, 2011-01-21 at 14:45 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: >> * it seems like overkill to not let clients to even connect when >> allow_standalone_primary=off and no synchronous standbys are available. >> What if you just want to run a read-only query? > > That's what Aidan requested, I agreed and so its there. You're using > sync rep because of writes, so you have a read-write app. If you allow > connections then half of the app will work, half will not. Half-working > isn't very useful, as Aidan eloquently explained. If your app is all > read-only you wouldn't be using sync rep anyway. That's the argument, > but I've not got especially strong feelings it has to be this way. > > Perhaps discuss that on a separate thread? See what everyone thinks?
I'll respond here once, and we'll see if more people want to comment then we can move it :-) Doesn't this make a pretty strange assumption - namely that you have a single application? We support multiple databases, and multiple users, and multiple pretty much anything - in most cases, people deploy multiple apps. (They may well be part of the same "solution" or whatever you want to call it, but parts may well be readonly - like a reporting app, or even just a monitoring client) -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
