On 1/26/16 10:56 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: > Removing one of "archive" or "hot standby" will just cause confusion and > breakage, so neither is a good choice for removal.
I'm pretty sure nothing would break, but I do agree that it could be confusing. > What we should do is > 1. Map "archive" and "hot_standby" to one level with a new name that > indicates that it can be used for both/either backup or replication. > (My suggested name for the new level is "replica"...) I have been leaning toward making up a new name, too, but hadn't found a good one. I tend to like "replica", though. > 2. Deprecate "archive" and "hot_standby" so that those will be removed > in a later release. If we do 1, then we might as well get rid of the old names right away. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers