Re: recovery_connections cannot start (was Re: master in standby mode croaks)
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
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: 2010-04-26T14:41:03Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 10:23 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > 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? We'll decide on the appropriate solution based on whatever our needs are at that time? ...Robert