On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 10:46 PM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 2014-08-26 16:41:44 -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> On 8/26/14 12:40 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> > I think the first reason is gone now, and the risk/damage of the two
>> > connections is probably smaller than running out of WAL. -x is a good
>> > default for smaller systems, but -X is a safer one for bigger ones. So
>> > I agree that changing the default mode would make sense.
>>
>> I would seriously consider just removing one of the modes. Having two
>> modes is complex enough, and then having different defaults in different
>> versions, and fuzzy recommendations like, it's better for "smaller
>> systems", it's quite confusing.
>
> Happy with removing the option and just accepting -X for backward
> compat.
Works for me - this is really the cleaner way of doing it...
If we do that, perhaps we should backpatch a deprecation notice into
the 9.4 docs?
>> I don't think it's a fundamental problem to say, you need 2 connections
>> to use this feature. (For example, you need a second connection to
>> issue a cancel request. Nobody has ever complained about that.)
>
> Well, replication connections are more limited in number than normal
> connections... And cancel requests are very short lived.
Yeah. But as long as we document it clearly, we should be OK I think.
And it's fairly clearly documented now - just need to be sure not to
remove that when changing the -x stuff.
-- Magnus HaganderMe: http://www.hagander.net/Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
