On 2/7/16 4:47 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 1/26/16 10:56 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: >> Removing one of "archive" or "hot standby" will just cause confusion and >> breakage, so neither is a good choice for removal. >> >> What we should do is >> 1. Map "archive" and "hot_standby" to one level with a new name that >> indicates that it can be used for both/either backup or replication. >> (My suggested name for the new level is "replica"...) >> 2. Deprecate "archive" and "hot_standby" so that those will be removed >> in a later release. > > Updated patch to reflect these suggestions.
-#define XLogIsNeeded() (wal_level >= WAL_LEVEL_ARCHIVE) +#define XLogIsNeeded() (wal_level >= WAL_LEVEL_REPLICA) <...> -#define XLogStandbyInfoActive() (wal_level >= WAL_LEVEL_HOT_STANDBY) +#define XLogStandbyInfoActive() (wal_level >= WAL_LEVEL_REPLICA) Since these are identical now shouldn't one be removed? I searched the code and I couldn't find anything that looked dead (i.e. XLogIsNeeded() && !XLogStandbyInfoActive()) but it still seems like having both could cause confusion. -- -David da...@pgmasters.net
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
