Richard Huxton <dev@archonet.com> writes:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> What's wrong with synchronous_commit? It's accurate and simple.
> My concern would be that it can be read two ways:
> 1. When you commit, sync (something or other - unspecified)
> 2. Synchronise commits (to each other? to something else?)*
Well, that's a fair point. deferred_commit would avoid that objection.
I'm not sure it's real important though --- with practically all of the
postgresql.conf variables, you really need to read the manual to know
exactly what they do.
regards, tom lane
