Re: [HACKERS] XLOG_PARAMETER_CHANGE handling of wal_log_hints

2015-01-15 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 01/07/2015 11:53 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote: On 07/01/15 00:59, Michael Paquier wrote: On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 4:24 AM, Petr Jelinek p...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: Hi, when I was fixing how commit_ts handles the XLOG_PARAMETER_CHANGE I noticed that for wal_log_hints we assign the value in

Re: [HACKERS] XLOG_PARAMETER_CHANGE handling of wal_log_hints

2015-01-07 Thread Petr Jelinek
On 07/01/15 00:59, Michael Paquier wrote: On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 4:24 AM, Petr Jelinek p...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: Hi, when I was fixing how commit_ts handles the XLOG_PARAMETER_CHANGE I noticed that for wal_log_hints we assign the value in ControFile to current value instead of value that

Re: [HACKERS] XLOG_PARAMETER_CHANGE handling of wal_log_hints

2015-01-06 Thread Michael Paquier
On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 4:24 AM, Petr Jelinek p...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: Hi, when I was fixing how commit_ts handles the XLOG_PARAMETER_CHANGE I noticed that for wal_log_hints we assign the value in ControFile to current value instead of value that comes from WAL. ISTM it has just

[HACKERS] XLOG_PARAMETER_CHANGE handling of wal_log_hints

2015-01-06 Thread Petr Jelinek
Hi, when I was fixing how commit_ts handles the XLOG_PARAMETER_CHANGE I noticed that for wal_log_hints we assign the value in ControFile to current value instead of value that comes from WAL. ISTM it has just information value so it should not have any practical impact, but it looks like a