On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 7:03 PM, Josh Berkus <j...@agliodbs.com> wrote: > 2. should we warn the user, or refuse to start up?
One nice property of allowing cyclicity is that it's easier to syndicate application of WAL to a series of standbys before promotion of exactly one to act as a primary (basically, to perform catch-up). One could imagine someone wanting a configuration that was like: +------------>r2 | | r1 <-----------+ This is only one step before: r1------------>r2 or r2------------>r1 (and, most importantly, after the cycle quiesces one can choose either one) For my use, I'm not convinced that such checks and warnings are useful if delivered by default, and I think outright rejection of cyclicity is harmful. -- fdr -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
