Re: warning to publication created and wal_level is not set to logical

From: Lucas Viecelli <lviecelli199(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: warning to publication created and wal_level is not set to logical
Date: 2019-03-25 13:20:54
Message-ID: CAPjy-54X9XUcDwNa10QCToC3-wcfo_ZoukEi=8CUwV+7M3Vq+A@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>
> > Is a WARNING sufficient? Maybe I'm misunderstanding something
>
> important, but I think the attempt should fail with a HINT to set the
> > wal_level ahead of time.
>

I thought about this possibility, but I was afraid to change the current
behavior a lot, but it's worth discussing.

>
>
I agree that it'd be nice to be noisier about the problem, but I'm
> not sure we can do more than bleat in the postmaster log from time
> to time if a publication is active and wal_level is too low.
> (And we'd better be careful about the log-spam aspect of that...)
>

I agree on being noisier, but I think the main thing is to let the user
aware of the situation and in that the
patch resolves, stating that he needs to adjust wal_level. Initially
WARNING will appear only at the time
the publication is created, precisely not to put spam in the log.

Is it better to warn from time to time that wal_level needs to change
because it has some publication that will not work?
--

*Lucas Viecelli*

<http://www.leosoft.com.br/coopcred>

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Haribabu Kommi 2019-03-25 13:25:19 Re: Transaction commits VS Transaction commits (with parallel) VS query mean time
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2019-03-25 13:20:39 Re: GiST VACUUM