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 (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
