On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 8:05 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
<heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Personally I agree with your objection to "crash" but not with the
>> objection to "standby". Maybe this would be appropriate:
>>
>> wal_mode = minimal | archive | hot_standby
>
> Ok, here's a patch implementing this proposal. It adds a new wal_mode
> setting, leaving archive_mode as it is. If you try to enable
> archive_mode when wal_mode is 'minimal', you get a warning and
> archive_mode is silently ignored. Likewise streaming replication
> connections are not allowed if wal_mode is 'minimal'.
> recovery_connections now does nothing in the master.
>
> A bit more bikeshedding before I commit this:
>
> * Should an invalid combination throw an ERROR and refuse to start,
> instead of just warning?
I think so. Otherwise silent breakage is a real possibility.
> * How about naming the parameter wal_level instead of wal_mode? That
> would better convey that the higher levels add stuff on top of the lower
> levels, instead of having different modes that are somehow mutually
> exclusive.
That works for me.
...Robert
