On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 10:23 AM, Tom Lane <[email protected]> wrote: > Robert Haas <[email protected]> writes: >> On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 8:05 AM, Heikki Linnakangas >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> * 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. > >> That works for me. > > What happens in the future if we have more options and they don't fall > into a neat superset order?
We'll decide on the appropriate solution based on whatever our needs are at that time? ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([email protected]) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
