On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 3:56 AM, David G. Johnston <david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Peter Eisentraut > <peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> >> On 5/31/16 1:47 PM, Jaime Casanova wrote: >>> >>> Are we going to change synchronous_standby_names? Certainly the GUC is >>> not *only* a list of names anymore. >>> >>> synchronous_standby_config? >>> synchronous_standbys (adjust to correct english if necesary)? >> >> >> If the existing values are still going to be accepted, then I would leave >> it as is. > > > +1
+1. We've made quite a lot of deal to take an approach for the N-sync that is 100% backward-compatible, it would be good to not break that effort. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
