Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I think everyone agrees the current code is unusable, per Heikki's
> comment about a WAL file arriving after a period of no WAL
> activity
I don't.
I am curious to hear how many complaints we've had from alpha and
beta testers of HS regarding this issue. I know that if we used it
with our software, the issue would probably go unnoticed because of
our usage patterns and automatic query retry. A positive setting
would work as intended for us. I can think of pessimal usage
patterns, different software approaches, and/or goals for HS usage
which would conflict badly with a positive setting. Hopefully we
can document this area better than we've historically done with, for
example, fsync -- which has similar trade-offs, only with more dire
consequences for bad user choices.
-Kevin
