On 21/09/16 09:18, Vik Fearing wrote: > On 09/21/2016 08:30 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: >> On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 2:04 AM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> Since we already released 9.6RC1, I understand that it's quite hard to >>> change syntax of 9.6. >>> But considering that we support the quorum commit, this could be one >>> of the solutions in order to avoid breaking backward compatibility and >>> to provide useful user interface. >>> So I attached these patches. >> >> standby_config: >> - standby_list { $$ = create_syncrep_config("1", $1); } >> - | FIRST NUM '(' standby_list ')' { $$ = >> create_syncrep_config($1, $4); } >> + standby_list { $$ = >> create_syncrep_config("1", $1, SYNC_REP_PRIORITY); } >> + | ANY NUM '(' standby_list ')' { $$ = >> create_syncrep_config($2, $4, SYNC_REP_QUORUM); } >> + | FIRST NUM '(' standby_list ')' { $$ = >> create_syncrep_config($2, $4, SYNC_REP_PRIORITY); } >> >> Reading again the thread, it seems that my previous post [1] was a bit >> misunderstood. My position is to not introduce any new behavior >> changes in 9.6, so we could just make the FIRST NUM grammar equivalent >> to NUM. >> >> [1]: >> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAB7nPqRDvJn18e54ccNpOP1A2_iUN6-iU=4njgmmgiagvcs...@mail.gmail.com > > I misunderstood your intent, then. But I still stand by what I did > understand, namely that 'k (...)' should mean 'any k (...)'. It's much > more natural than having it mean 'first k (...)' and I also think it > will be more frequent in practice. >
I think so as well. -- Petr Jelinek http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers