On 1 September 2015 at 10:39, Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> wrote: > So we've had several rounds of discussions about simplifying replication > configuration in general and the wal_level setting in particular. [0][1] > > [snip] > > Bike-shedding: In this patch, I removed "archive" and kept > "hot_standby", because that's what the previous discussions suggested. > Historically and semantically, it would be more correct the other way > around. On the other hand, keeping "hot_standby" would probably require > fewer configuration files to be changed. Or we could keep both, but > that would be confusing (for users and in the code).
We need to keep both, IMO, with 'archive' as an obsolete synonym for hot_standby. Otherwise pg_upgrade will get grumpy, and so will users who migrate their configurations. -- Craig Ringer 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
