Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: [HACKERS] wal_level > WAL_LEVEL_LOGICAL - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [HACKERS] wal_level > WAL_LEVEL_LOGICAL
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoavskoSKMfuOx-YTDavjuuPoYVLCN7PUq3W=m4vHxzjEA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to [HACKERS] wal_level > WAL_LEVEL_LOGICAL  (Neha Khatri <nehakhatri5@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] wal_level > WAL_LEVEL_LOGICAL  (Neha Khatri <nehakhatri5@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tree view 
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 9:08 AM, Neha Khatri <nehakhatri5@gmail.com> wrote:
> As per my understabding, current postgres server supports only three
> values for wal_level i.e. 'minimal' , 'replica' or 'logical'. But
> following error message brought to notice that there are various code
> spots that try to look for wal_level >= WAL_LEVEL_LOGICAL:

I suspect that this was intended as future-proofing.  I think it's
actually very reasonable to write the internal tests that way, but it
does seem strange that it's crept into the user-visible error
messages.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Index created in BEFORE trigger not updated during INSERT
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Broken hint bits (freeze)