Re: [HACKERS] [bug fix] PG10: libpq doesn't connect to alternativehosts when some errors occur
От | Michael Paquier |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] [bug fix] PG10: libpq doesn't connect to alternativehosts when some errors occur |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAB7nPqSx_Pqt1KXfkJAM2PTa0hwa6Y6S3XSn81_Ej20TjC2tWA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] [bug fix] PG10: libpq doesn't connect to alternativehosts when some errors occur ("Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa.takay@jp.fujitsu.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] [bug fix] PG10: libpq doesn't connect to alternativehosts when some errors occur
[HACKERS] Re: [bug fix] PG10: libpq doesn't connect to alternative hosts whensome errors occur |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Tsunakawa, Takayuki <tsunakawa.takay@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote: > From: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org >> [mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Peter Eisentraut >> The problem is that if we decide to change the behavior mid-beta, then we'll >> only have the rest of beta to find out whether people will like the other >> behavior. >> >> I would aim for the behavior that is most suitable for refinement in the >> future. The current behavior seems to match that. > > I think the pre-final release period is the very timing for refinement, in the perspective of users and PG developers asusers. Sure that is the correct period to argue. > One thing I'm worried is that people here might become more conservative against change once the final version is released. Any redesign after release would finish by being a new feature, which would be in this case a new connection parameter or an extra option that works with the current parameter, say something to allow soft or hard failures when multiple hosts are defined. -- Michael
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: