Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2

On 2016-04-04 10:35:34 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 4 April 2016 at 09:28, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Barring any objections, I'll commit this patch.

No objection here either, just one question: Has anybody thought about
the ability to extend this to do per-database syncrep? Logical decoding
works on a database level, and that can cause some problems with global
configuration.

> That sounds good.
> 
> May I have one more day to review this? Actually more like 3-4 hours.

> I have no comments on an initial read, so I'm hopeful of having nothing at
> all to say on it.

Simon, perhaps you could hold the above question in your mind while
looking through this?

Thanks,

Andres