On 2017-05-23 10:49:54 +0000, Neha Khatri wrote: > On Tue, 23 May 2017 at 10:55 am, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> > wrote: > > > Neha Khatri wrote: > > > On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 10:26 AM, Michael Paquier < > > michael.paqu...@gmail.com > > > > > > There is no wal_level higher than logical, so the current sense looks > > > > perfectly fine to me. > > > > > > If there is no wal_level higher than logical, should the following error > > > message indicate to set it >= logical. > > > > > > select * from > > > pg_create_logical_replication_slot('regression_slot','test_decoding'); > > > ERROR: logical decoding requires wal_level >= logical > > > > I think it's purposefully ambiguous to cover a possible future > > extension.
Right, IIRC that's how this notion started. > Should documentation also have similar statement and indicate future > possibility. > > What is the benefit of having it just in error message. I personally wouldn't do anything here, it doesn't seem an issue. - Andres -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers