On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 7:07 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 6:30 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>> Agreed on the general point, but AFAICS that proposal keeps the meaning
>>> of archive_mode the same as it was.
>
>> Well, clearly it doesn't. Someone who thinks they can simply turn
>> archive_mode=on and set archive_command is going to be sadly
>> disappointed.
>
> Well, there is another variable that they'll have to adjust as well,
> but ISTM that archive_mode still does what it did before, ie, determine
> whether we attempt to archive WAL segments.
But it doesn't do EVERYTHING that it did before. Changing the name
would make that a lot more clear. Of course I just work here.
...Robert
