At 2026-03-04 22:11:16, "Euler Taveira" <euler@eulerto.com> wrote:
>On Wed, Mar 4, 2026, at 8:34 AM, Florents Tselai wrote:
>>
>> + <literal>logical</literal> adds information necessary to support
>> + <link linkend="logical-replication">logical replication</link>, which
>> + relies on logical decoding. Each level includes the information logged
>> + at all lower levels.
>>
>
>I'm not opposed to this idea. However, I would like to point out that
>
>1) "replication" is mentioned for _replica_ which can introduce some confusion
>if we add "logical replication". Maybe it is a good idea to change the sentence
>below from "replication" to "physical replication".
>
>> The default value is replica, which writes enough data to support WAL
>> archiving and replication
>
>2) There is no link to the sentence above. If you add a link to the logical
>replication section, I would suggest to add a link to the other cases (WAL
>archiving, physical replication) too.
>
>3) If we are using "logical replication", should we mention "logical decoding"?
>The Logical Replication chapter mentions the use of logical decoding in the
>Architecture section.
>
>>
>> Something like:
>> Note that setting this parameter only enables the required WAL format;
>> it does not configure logical replication by itself.
>>
>
>I don't think such note should be added. If the DBA doesn't know how to setup
>logical replication, it should read the Logical Replication chapter.
>
>
>--
>Euler Taveira
>EDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/
I fully agree with the points you've raised. I hope the author incorporates them.
