Hi, I read the discussion at
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2011-01/msg00315.php From what I can understand, going from/to unlogged to/from logged in the wal_level == minimal case is not too complicated. Suppose I try to write a patch that allows ALTER TABLE tablename SET LOGGED (or UNLOGGED) (proper sql wording to be discussed...) only in the wal_level == minimal case: would it be accepted as a "first step"? Or rejected because it doesn't allow it in the other cases? From what I got in the discussion, handling the other wal_level cases can be very complicated (example: the issues in case "we *crash* without writing an abort record"). Leonardo -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
