Re: allowing wal_level change at run time

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: allowing wal_level change at run time
Date: 2015-08-18 17:24:54
Message-ID: 55D36A66.9050008@gmx.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 8/18/15 12:35 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> If archive_mode=on or max_wal_senders>0, then we need at least
> wal_level=archive. Otherwise wal_level=minimal is enough.

Totally forgot about max_wal_senders.

However, the thread I linked to earlier aimed for a different master
plan (or if not, I'm aiming for it now). There is camp 1, which wants
to keep all the defaults the same, for "performance" or something like
that. And there is camp 2, which wants to have a replication-friendly
setup by default. Instead of fighting over this, your idea was to be
able to switch between 1 and 2 easily (which means in particular without
restarts).

But if we tie the effective wal_level to archive_mode or
max_wal_senders, both of which are restart-only, then we haven't gained
anything. (We would have removed half a GUC parameter, effectively.
Not bad, but not very exciting.)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2015-08-18 17:31:38 Re: Declarative partitioning
Previous Message Robert Haas 2015-08-18 17:04:27 Re: [patch] psql tab completion for grant execute