Re: remove wal_level archive

From: Euler Taveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com(dot)br>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: remove wal_level archive
Date: 2016-01-26 18:37:51
Message-ID: 56A7BCFF.6060008@timbira.com.br
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 26-01-2016 12:56, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Removing one of "archive" or "hot standby" will just cause confusion and
> breakage, so neither is a good choice for removal.
>
Agree.

> What we should do is
> 1. Map "archive" and "hot_standby" to one level with a new name that
> indicates that it can be used for both/either backup or replication.
> (My suggested name for the new level is "replica"...)
> 2. Deprecate "archive" and "hot_standby" so that those will be removed
> in a later release.
>
3. Add a WARNING at startup (until removal of values) saying something
like "'archive' value is deprecated and will be removed in a future
version. Use 'replica' value instead."

--
Euler Taveira Timbira - http://www.timbira.com.br/
PostgreSQL: Consultoria, Desenvolvimento, Suporte 24x7 e Treinamento

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Corey Huinker 2016-01-26 19:07:55 Re: Add generate_series(date, date) and generate_series(date, date, integer)
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2016-01-26 18:26:26 Re: Add generate_series(date,date) and generate_series(date,date,integer)