On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Petr Jelinek <p...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >>> I'm a bit late to the party, but wouldn't >>> >>> recovery_target_action = ... >>> >>> have been a better name for this? It'd be in line with the other >>> recovery_target_* parameters, and also a bit shorter than the imho >>> somewhat ugly "action_at_recovery_target". >> >> FWIW, I too think that "recovery_target_action" is a better name. > > I agree.
+1. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
