| From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Replication logging |
| Date: | 2011-01-17 16:58:03 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTi=qFj+NdnHdGS8DAF1ESFmcSwwN73iABzbzS-GQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 17:46, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
>> Before I go ahead and commit the part that adds
>> log_replication_connections, anybody else want to object to the idea?
>
> I think it'd make more sense just to say that replication connections
> are subject to the same log_connections rule as others. An extra GUC
> for this is surely overkill.
I thought so, but Robert didn't agree. And given that things are the
way they are, clearly somebody else didn't agree as well - though I've
been unable to locate the original discussion if there was one.
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2011-01-17 16:58:21 | Re: Moving test_fsync to /contrib? |
| Previous Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2011-01-17 16:53:39 | Re: REVIEW: Extensions support for pg_dump |