Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints

From: Maciek Sakrejda <m(dot)sakrejda(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints
Date: 2022-02-14 20:31:16
Message-ID: CAOtHd0Dq0SWNtH8z0pu1d_hB1jMnGXJ_krxd_BHLb2Hk2BToLg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andrew made a good case above for avoiding LOG:

>I do think we should be wary of any name starting with "LOG", though.
>Long experience tells us that's something that confuses users when it
refers to the WAL.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2022-02-14 20:42:40 Re: Time to drop plpython2?
Previous Message Robert Haas 2022-02-14 20:17:48 Re: generic plans and "initial" pruning