On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 11:46 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 12:50 PM, David Steele <da...@pgmasters.net> wrote:
>> On 3/11/16 1:29 PM, David Steele wrote:
>>> Unless anyone has objections I would like to mark this 'ready for
>>> committer'.
>> This patch is now ready for committer.
> Yes, thanks, I am cool with this version as well. I guess I should
> have done what you just did at my last review to be honest.

This patch has been committed as b555ed8, and maps wal_level =
"archive" to "hot_standby". As mentioned here, the condition to skip
checkpoints when a system is idle is already broken for a couple of
releases when wal_level = "hot_standby":
So now it is broken as for "archive".

This has been already discussed on this thread:
And there is a patch as well:

As the bug discussed previously is now also a regression specific to
9.6, are there objections if I add an open item?

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to