Re: recovery_connections cannot start (was Re: master in standby mode croaks)

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2010-04-26T14:23:45Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 8:05 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
> <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>> * How about naming the parameter wal_level instead of wal_mode? That
>> would better convey that the higher levels add stuff on top of the lower
>> levels, instead of having different modes that are somehow mutually
>> exclusive.

> That works for me.

What happens in the future if we have more options and they don't fall
into a neat superset order?

			regards, tom lane