Pavan Deolasee escribió:
> Yeah, I had brought up similar idea up thread. Right now wal_level is
> nicely ordered. But with this additional logic, I am not sure if we would
> need multiple new levels and also break that ordering (I don't know if its
> important). For example, one may want to set up streaming replication
> with/without this feature or hot standby with/without the feature. I don't
> have a good idea about how to capture them in wal_level. May be something
> like: minimal, archive, archive_with_this_new_feature, hot_standby and
> hot_standby_with_this_new_feature.
That's confusing. A separate GUC sounds better.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
