On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 5:57 AM, Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> wrote: > In fact I've been considering suggesting we might want to retire the > difference between archive and hot_standby as wal_level, because the > difference is usually so small. And the advantage of hot_standby is in > almost every case worth it. Even in the archive recovery mode, being > able to do pause_at_recovery_target is extremely useful. And as you > say in (c) above, many users don't realize that until it's too late. +1 on removing archive from wal_level. Having both archive and hot_standby for wal_level is confusing, and if I recall correctly hot_standby and archive have been kept as possible settings only to protect people from bugs that the newly-introduced hot_standby could introduce due to the few WAL records it adds. But it has been a couple of releases since there have been no such bugs, no? -- Michael
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
