[pgpool-hackers: 4348] Re: Proposal: Add user_redirect_preference_list

[Bo Peng]

Thank you Ishii-san.
I am going to commit this patch.

On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 10:47:30 +0900 (JST)
Tatsuo Ishii <ishii at sraoss.co.jp> wrote:

> > Hi,
> > 
> > On Tue, 23 May 2023 19:23:25 +0900 (JST)
> > Tatsuo Ishii <ishii at sraoss.co.jp> wrote:
> > 
> >> > Yes. I know the setting of app_name takes precedence if both of database and app_name are matched.
> >> > 
> >> > If we set:
> >> > 
> >> >   database_redirect_preference_list = 'test1:standby'
> >> >   app_name_redirect_preference_list = 'app1:primary'
> >> > 
> >> > The following query will be sent to primary because the query matched both conditions
> >> > and app_name takes precedence
> >> > 
> >> >     PGAPPNAME=app1 psql -d test1 -c "select 1"
> >> > 
> >> > However, users can configure the behavior of both database and app_name at the same time.
> >> > 
> >> > For example, the following query will be sent to standby,
> >> > 
> >> >     PGAPPNAME=app2 psql -d test1 -c "select 1"
> >> > 
> >> > and the following query will be sent to primary.
> >> > 
> >> >     PGAPPNAME=app1 psql -d test2 -c "select 1"
> >> > 
> >> > 
> >> > I agree to unify the three settings of database, app_name and user,
> >> > but we should mention that user can't set them at the same time.
> >> 
> >> I see your point. Maybe my idea (unifying *redirect_preference_list)
> >> is not so good in terms of backward compatibility? If so, we should
> >> give up the idea and just add
> >> "user_name_redirect_preference_list". What do you think?
> > 
> > Because of the backward compatibility, I decided to just add a new parameter  "user_redirect_preference_list".
> > 
> > Patch is attached.
> 
> Thanks for the patch! Looks good to me.
> 
> Best reagards,
> --
> Tatsuo Ishii
> SRA OSS LLC
> English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en/
> Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp


-- 
Bo Peng <pengbo at sraoss.co.jp>
SRA OSS LLC
https://www.sraoss.co.jp/