* Peter Eisentraut (pete...@gmx.net) wrote: > On 11/4/13, 8:58 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 5:57 AM, Michael Paquier > > <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> Please find attached a patch doing what is written in the $subject. > >> With the documentation updated, this is even better... > > > > I'm unconvinced that there's any value in this. > > Yeah, the only thing this will accomplish is to annoy people who are > actually using that level. It would be more interesting if we could get > rid of the wal_level setting altogether, but of course there are valid > reasons against that.
It would actually be valuable to 'upgrade' those people to
hot_standby, which is what I had kind of been hoping would happen
eventually. I agree that there's no use for 'archive' today, but rather
than break existing configs that use it, just make 'archive' and
'hot_standby' mean the same thing. In the end, I'd probably vote to
make 'hot_standby' the 'legacy/deprecated' term anyway.
Thanks,
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
