On Wed, 2010-04-28 at 10:43 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> * renamed wal_mode to wal_level
I'm wondering whether this should be a list rather than an enum? If we
add something in the future that adds more info to WAL but doesn't fit
the one-dimensional model this implements then we could be in trouble.
Should this be
e.g. wal_xxxx = feature2, feature3
e.g. wal_xxxx = feature3
e.g. wal_xxxx = feature1
recognising that some features require other features, so as an example
feature2 requires and implies feature1.
The word "level" implies a one-dimensionality that "mode" did not and I
feel a little uncertain about that term.
Other words: attributes, features, contents, info, options.
Hmm, wal_options sounds OK.
Anyway, just throwing out some ideas to make sure we're doing the right
thing with this.
-- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
