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