On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 8:00 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 7:28 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> I would expect that they'll get an error message that makes it clear >>> enough what to do ;-). In any case, changing the name is hardly going >>> to fix things so that 8.4 settings will still work, so why are you >>> giving that case as an argument for it? > >> Principle of obvious breakage. > > And? If we do it by adding the new variable while not renaming > archive_mode, then I'd expect an 8.4 configuration to yield an error > along the lines of > > ERROR: invalid combination of configuration parameters > HINT: To turn on archive_mode, you must set wal_mode to "archive" or > "hot_standby". > > (precise wording open to debate, but clearly we can do at least this > well) whereas if we rename archive_mode, it's unlikely we can do better > than > > ERROR: unrecognized parameter "archive_mode" > > Do you really think the second one is going to make any user happier > than the first?
OK, good point. I overlooked the fact that we could cross-check the parameter settings on the master - I was imagining the error showing up on the standby. Guess I'm a little slow today... ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
