Re: max_wal_senders must die
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: max_wal_senders must die |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 26037.1288208035@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: max_wal_senders must die (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: max_wal_senders must die
Re: max_wal_senders must die Re: max_wal_senders must die |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes: >>> Josh has completely failed to make a case that >>> that should be the default. >> >> Agreed. > In what way have a failed to make a case? You're assuming that we should set up the default behavior to support replication and penalize those who aren't using it. Considering that we haven't even *had* replication until now, it seems a pretty safe bet that the majority of our users aren't using it and won't appreciate that default. We routinely expend large amounts of effort to avoid cross-version performance regressions, and I don't see that this one is acceptable when others aren't. I entirely agree that it ought to be easier to set up replication. But there's a difference between having a big red EASY button for people to push, and pushing it for them. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: