Re: remove wal_level archive
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: remove wal_level archive |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoaJYr11EWkNJsjMUv83QErojNyE0Mn+ujtMX27oAfuT=g@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: remove wal_level archive (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 3:05 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Robert Haas wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 11:04 AM, Alvaro Herrera >> <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> > Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> >> So we've had several rounds of discussions about simplifying replication >> >> configuration in general and the wal_level setting in particular. [0][1] >> >> Let's get something going. >> > >> > I looked at this patch, which I think has got enough consensus that you >> > should just push forward with the proposed design -- in particular, just >> > remove one of archive or hot_standby values, not keep it as a synonym of >> > the other. If we're counting votes, I prefer keeping hot_standby over >> > archive. >> >> I see precisely 0 votes for that alternative upthread. I came the >> closest of anyone to endorsing that proposal, I think, but my >> preferred alternative is to change nothing. > > Hm? Perhaps the problem is that the thread stood on the shoulders of > larger threads. Andres Freund and Magnus Hagander both expressed, > independently, their desire to see one of these modes go away: > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20150203124317.GA24767@awork2.anarazel.de > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CABUevEy15Y=sF8doKjD86eujJZL=Tq2jyUSiYVkg6EVwVt=cag@mail.gmail.com OK, I see. > Actually, in the first of these threads > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/20150203124317.GA24767@awork2.anarazel.de > there's a lot of discussion about getting rid of wal_level completely > instead, but it doesn't look like there's any movement at all in that > direction. I think we should take this pretty small change that > improves things a bit in that direction, then others can continue to > propose further simplifications to our configuration in that area. > > We could continue to do nothing, but then we've already been doing that > for some time and it hasn't changed things much. True. But it hasn't really caused much trouble either. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: