On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 7:12 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 7:07 PM, Tom Lane <t...@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 -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
