On Fri, 2010-04-23 at 16:50 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
> > How about something like
>
> > wal_additional_info = none | archive | connect
>
> "connect" seems like a completely inappropriate word here. It is
> not obviously related to HS slaves and it could be taken to refer
> to ordinary database connections (sessions).
>
> Personally I agree with your objection to "crash" but not with the
> objection to "standby". Maybe this would be appropriate:
>
> wal_mode = minimal | archive | hot_standby
Sounds good, I'll go for that.
In my understanding this means that archive_mode does completely and the
max_wal_senders does not affect WAL contents?
Does that mean that wal_mode can be SIGHUP now? It would be good. I
think this is how to do that:
At the start of every WAL-avoiding operation we could take a copy of
wal_mode for the server and store in MyProc->wal_mode. At transaction
start we would set that to "not set". We could then make
pg_start_backup() wait for all transactions with wal_mode set to
complete before we continue.
-- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
