On Thu, 2010-04-29 at 09:48 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
> > recovery_connections was on by default and unanimous agreement until
> > recently and I don't want to change that now,
>
> Uh, it was on by default only because a lot of us hadn't noticed that.
> I agree with Heikki's position here: it should not be on by default.
We're talking about the case where somebody has set up a standby
database. It's not like they happen on this accidentally.
* HS on by default, in the standby, via recovery_connections.
* HS off by default, in the master, via wal_level.
Overall, that *is* off by default. (Note: I said nothing about that).
We don't need it off *twice*, nor do we even need two switches.
Last week we had one switch and it was on by default, now we're looking
at two switches and off by default. I haven't yet heard a good reason
for the change being proposed here by Heikki. The use cases are rare, if
they truly exist at all. Monitoring the standby is much easier with HS
on, for example.
What is the reason for the *extra* "off" switch? Why two? Why "off"
twice?
-- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
