On 2014-01-16 11:19:28 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > I think the usecases that would want this for DML probably also wan this > > to work for unlogged, temp tables. > > Huh? Unlogged tables generate *zero* WAL, by definition.
Yes. That's my point. If we provide it as a generic resource control - which what's being discussed here sounds to me - it should be generic. If we provide as a measure to prevent standbys from getting out of date due to maintenance commands, then it only needs to cover those. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
