On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 6:02 PM, David Steele <da...@pgmasters.net> wrote: > The biggest downside I can see is that this would change the naming scheme > for the default of 16MB compared to previous versions of Postgres. However, > for all other wal-seg-size values changes would need to be made anyway.
I think changing the naming convention for 16MB WAL segments, which is still going to be what 99% of people use, is an awfully large compatibility break for an awfully marginal benefit. We've already created quite a few incompatibilities in this release, and I'm not entirely eager to just keep cranking them out at top speed. Where it's necessary to achieve forward progress in some area, sure, but this feels gratuitous to me. I agree that we might have picked your scheme if we were starting from scratch, but I have a hard time believing it's a good idea to do it now just because of this patch. Changing the WAL segment size has been supported for a long time, and I don't see the fact that it will now potentially be initdb-configurable rather than configure-configurable as a sufficient justification for whacking around the naming scheme -- even though I don't love the naming scheme we've got. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
