Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints

On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 1:58 PM Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> > I think we have consensus on STRATEGY. I'm not sure if we have
> > consensus on what the option values should be. If we had an option to
> > use fs-based cloning, that would also need to issue a checkpoint,
> > which makes me think that CHECKPOINT is not the best name.
>
> I think if we want LOG, it has tob e WAL_LOG instead of just LOG.  Was
> there discussion that the user _has_ to specify and option instead of
> using a default?  That doesn't seem good.

I agree. I think we can set a default, which can be either whatever we
think will be best on average, or maybe it can be conditional based on
the database size or something.

-- 
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com