On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 10:57 AM, Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Also, what's the use case of allowing only a certain set of rmgrs to > be checked. Wouldn't a simple on/off switch be simpler? >
I think there should be a way to test WAL for one particular resource manager. For example, if someone develops a new index or some other heap storage, only that particular module can be verified. Generating WAL for all the resource managers together can also serve the purpose, but it will be slightly difficult to verify it. > As presented, > wal_consistency_mask is also going to be very quite confusing for > users. You should not need to apply some maths to set up this > parameter, a list of rmgr names may be more adapted if this level of > tuning is needed, > Yeah, that can be better. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
