Re: [PATCH 10/16] Introduce the concept that wal has a 'origin' node
От | Steve Singer |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PATCH 10/16] Introduce the concept that wal has a 'origin' node |
Дата | |
Msg-id | BLU0-SMTP100B908068AF656615EFAB9DCFF0@phx.gbl обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [PATCH 10/16] Introduce the concept that wal has a 'origin' node (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 12-06-18 11:50 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > Hi Simon, > I think we need to agree on the parameter name. It currently is > 'multimaster_node_id'. In the discussion with Steve we got to > "replication_node_id". I don't particularly like either. > > Other suggestions? > Other things that come to mind (for naming this parameter in the postgresql.conf) node_id origin_node_id local_node_id > I wished we had some flag bits available before as well. I find 256 nodes a > pretty low value to start with though, 4096 sounds better though, so I would > be happy with 4 flag bits. I think for cascading setups and such you want to > add node ids for every node, not only masters... > > Any opinions from others on this? > 256 sounds a bit low to me as well. Sometimes the use case of a retail chain comes up where people want each store to have a postgresql instance and replicate back to a central office. I can think of many chains with more than 256 stores. > Thanks, > > Andres
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: