Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> writes: > On 1/23/14, 4:08 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >> Why wouldn't that be necessary with your approach, too? I mean, if >> there's a GUC that controls the event source name, then it can be >> changed between restarts, regardless of what you call it.
> I don't know if it's practical, but the logical conclusion here would be > to use an identifier that you cannot change, such as the system identifier. That particular ID would be a horrid choice, because we don't try very hard to ensure it's unique. In particular, a standby server on the same machine as the master (not an uncommon case, at least for testing purposes) would be a guaranteed fail with that approach. I'm still not clear on why we can't just use the port number. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers