On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 6:01 AM, Leonardo Francalanci <m_lists@yahoo.it> wrote:
> I read the discussion at
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2011-01/msg00315.php
>
> From what I can understand, going from/to unlogged to/from logged in
> the wal_level == minimal case is not too complicated.
>
> Suppose I try to write a patch that allows
>
> ALTER TABLE tablename SET LOGGED (or UNLOGGED)
> (proper sql wording to be discussed...)
>
> only in the wal_level == minimal case: would it be accepted as a
> "first step"? Or rejected because it doesn't allow it in the other
> cases?
I'm pretty sure we wouldn't accept a patch for a feature that would
only work with wal_level=minimal, but it might be a useful starting
point for someone else to keep hacking on.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
