Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@gmail.com> writes: > Hmm.. I think that we reached the consensus about merging two GUCs > in previous discussion. You argue that synchronization level should be > controlled in separate two parameters?
No, sorry about confusion. One GUC is better. What I'm wondering is why commit it *now*, because I think we didn't yet decide on what the supported behaviors supported in 9.1 should be. Regards, -- Dimitri Fontaine http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
