Re: Replication/backup defaults

On 1/10/17 3:06 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:

> * Magnus Hagander (magnus(at)hagander(dot)net) wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 8:03 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

>>> I may be outvoted, but I'm still not in favor of changing the default
>>> wal_level. That caters only to people who lack sufficient foresight
>>> to know that they need a replica before the system becomes so critical
>>> that they can't bounce it to update the configuration.
>>
>> True. But the current level only caters to those people who run large ETL
>> jobs without doing any tuning on their system (at least none that would
>> require a restart), or another one of the fairly specific workloads.
>>
>> And as I keep re-iterating, it's not just about replicas, it's also about
>> the ability to make proper backups. Which is a pretty fundamental feature.
>>
>> I do think you are outvoted, yes :) At least that's the result of my
>> tallying up the people who have spoken out on the thread.
>
> I tend to agree with Magnus on this, being able to perform an online
> backup is pretty darn important.

Agreed and +1.

--
-David
david(at)pgmasters(dot)net