Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make CheckRequiredParameterValues() depend upon correct
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make CheckRequiredParameterValues() depend upon correct |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1272441604.4161.9702.camel@ebony обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make CheckRequiredParameterValues() depend upon correct (Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make CheckRequiredParameterValues()
depend upon correct
Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make CheckRequiredParameterValues() depend upon correct |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2010-04-28 at 10:43 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > * renamed wal_mode to wal_level I'm wondering whether this should be a list rather than an enum? If we add something in the future that adds more info to WAL but doesn't fit the one-dimensional model this implements then we could be in trouble. Should this be e.g. wal_xxxx = feature2, feature3 e.g. wal_xxxx = feature3 e.g. wal_xxxx = feature1 recognising that some features require other features, so as an example feature2 requires and implies feature1. The word "level" implies a one-dimensionality that "mode" did not and I feel a little uncertain about that term. Other words: attributes, features, contents, info, options. Hmm, wal_options sounds OK. Anyway, just throwing out some ideas to make sure we're doing the right thing with this. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: