On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 7:12 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 7:07 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>> 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.
>
> I think from the user's point of view it does what it did before.
> The fact that the actual content of WAL changed was an implementation
> detail that users weren't aware of. Now that we have two interacting
> features that affect WAL contents, it's getting too hard to hide that
> from users --- but I see no need to rename archive_mode.
Well, when people use their same settings that they used for 8.4 and
it doesn't work, you can field those reports...
...Robert
