On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 7:28 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 7:12 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> I think from the user's point of view it does what it did before. >>> The fact that the actual content of WAL changed was an implementation >>> detail that users weren't aware of. Now that we have two interacting >>> features that affect WAL contents, it's getting too hard to hide that >>> from users --- but I see no need to rename archive_mode. > >> Well, when people use their same settings that they used for 8.4 and >> it doesn't work, you can field those reports... > > I would expect that they'll get an error message that makes it clear > enough what to do ;-). In any case, changing the name is hardly going > to fix things so that 8.4 settings will still work, so why are you > giving that case as an argument for it?
Principle of obvious breakage. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers