Greetings, * Magnus Hagander (mag...@hagander.net) wrote: > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 8:03 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Peter Eisentraut > > <peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > > On 1/9/17 7:44 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > >> So based on that, I suggest we go ahead and make the change to make both > > >> the values 10 by default. And that we do that now, because that lets us > > >> get it out through more testing on different platforms, so that we catch > > >> issues earlier on if they do arise. > > > > > > Sounds good. > > > > I may be outvoted, but I'm still not in favor of changing the default > > wal_level. That caters only to people who lack sufficient foresight > > to know that they need a replica before the system becomes so critical > > that they can't bounce it to update the configuration. > > True. But the current level only caters to those people who run large ETL > jobs without doing any tuning on their system (at least none that would > require a restart), or another one of the fairly specific workloads. > > And as I keep re-iterating, it's not just about replicas, it's also about > the ability to make proper backups. Which is a pretty fundamental feature. > > I do think you are outvoted, yes :) At least that's the result of my > tallying up the people who have spoken out on the thread.
I tend to agree with Magnus on this, being able to perform an online backup is pretty darn important. Thanks! Stephen
Description: Digital signature