On 05.04.2011 11:31, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
> Fujii Masao<[email protected]> writes:
>> Hmm.. I think that we reached the consensus about merging two GUCs
>> in previous discussion. You argue that synchronization level should be
>> controlled in separate two parameters?
>
> No, sorry about confusion. One GUC is better. What I'm wondering is
> why commit it *now*, because I think we didn't yet decide on what the
> supported behaviors supported in 9.1 should be.
What do you mean by "supported behaviors"?
-- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com