Re: allowing wal_level change at run time - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: allowing wal_level change at run time
Date
Msg-id 55D36A66.9050008@gmx.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: allowing wal_level change at run time  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: allowing wal_level change at run time  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 8/18/15 12:35 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> If archive_mode=on or max_wal_senders>0, then we need at least
> wal_level=archive.  Otherwise wal_level=minimal is enough.

Totally forgot about max_wal_senders.

However, the thread I linked to earlier aimed for a different master
plan (or if not, I'm aiming for it now).  There is camp 1, which wants
to keep all the defaults the same, for "performance" or something like
that.  And there is camp 2, which wants to have a replication-friendly
setup by default.  Instead of fighting over this, your idea was to be
able to switch between 1 and 2 easily (which means in particular without
restarts).

But if we tie the effective wal_level to archive_mode or
max_wal_senders, both of which are restart-only, then we haven't gained
anything.  (We would have removed half a GUC parameter, effectively.
Not bad, but not very exciting.)




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [patch] psql tab completion for grant execute
Next
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: Declarative partitioning