From: Simon Riggs on 23 Apr 2010 15:11 On Fri, 2010-04-23 at 15:05 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > we have a consensus behind changing it, which it's starting to > sound like we do. I think you misread the +1s from Masao and myself. Those confusing things are options and I want them to remain optional, not compressed into a potentially too simple model based upon how the world looks right now. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
From: Simon Riggs on 23 Apr 2010 15:38 On Fri, 2010-04-23 at 15:18 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > We're going to need > a bunch of GUCs any way we slice it. The issue is whether there's a > way to slice it that involves fewer AND and OR operators that have to > be understood by users. So we're proposing adding parameters to simplify things for users? I don't think fiddling is going to improve things significantly from a usability perspective, especially at the last minute. I'm guessing this conversation has more to do with the situation that some very clever people have a little time on their hands after a long period of hard work. I see no problem that needs to be solved, not alongside this water cooler at least. Smells like beta time. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
From: Heikki Linnakangas on 26 Apr 2010 08:05 Tom Lane wrote: > Personally I agree with your objection to "crash" but not with the > objection to "standby". Maybe this would be appropriate: > > wal_mode = minimal | archive | hot_standby Ok, here's a patch implementing this proposal. It adds a new wal_mode setting, leaving archive_mode as it is. If you try to enable archive_mode when wal_mode is 'minimal', you get a warning and archive_mode is silently ignored. Likewise streaming replication connections are not allowed if wal_mode is 'minimal'. recovery_connections now does nothing in the master. A bit more bikeshedding before I commit this: * Should an invalid combination throw an ERROR and refuse to start, instead of just warning? * How about naming the parameter wal_level instead of wal_mode? That would better convey that the higher levels add stuff on top of the lower levels, instead of having different modes that are somehow mutually exclusive. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
From: Josh Berkus on 26 Apr 2010 14:15 Folks, (a) is this checked in yet? (b) should we delay Beta to test it?\ -- -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://www.pgexperts.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
First
|
Prev
|
Pages: 1 2 3 Prev: Move tablespace Next: pgsql: Make CheckRequiredParameterValues() dependupon correct |