On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 11:18 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Andres Freund wrote:
>> On 2016-03-31 10:15:21 +0900, Ian Barwick wrote:
>
>> > Patch changes the error message to:
>> >
>> > ERROR: replication slots can only be used if wal_level is "replica" or "logical"
>> >
>> > Explicitly naming the valid WAL levels matches the wording in the wal_level
>> > error hint used in a couple of places, i.e.
>>
>> The explicit naming makes it much more verbose to change anything around
>> wal level though, so consider me not a fan of spelling out all levels.
>
> I thought we had agreed that we weren't going to consider the wal_level
> values as a linear scale -- in other words, wordings such as "greater
> than FOO" are discouraged. That's always seemed a bit odd to me.
Yes, that's what I thought as well.
--
Michael
