On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 10:23 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 8:05 AM, Heikki Linnakangas >> <heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >>> * How about naming the parameter wal_level instead of wal_mode? That >>> would better convey that the higher levels add stuff on top of the lower >>> levels, instead of having different modes that are somehow mutually >>> exclusive. > >> That works for me. > > What happens in the future if we have more options and they don't fall > into a neat superset order?
We'll decide on the appropriate solution based on whatever our needs are at that time? ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
