Message-ID: <78ff5cc9-268f-4be8-ae0b-c1a07dc24852@proxel.se>
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2026 23:59:24 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: doc: Improve wal_level and effective_wal_level GUC around logical
 replication
To: "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>,
 PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
References: 
 <CAKFQuwY=WLF0OH8JE5T8S=aj0LBydiSn02fkRE73Sm_KSLRqJQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Andreas Karlsson <andreas@proxel.se>
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAKFQuwY=WLF0OH8JE5T8S=aj0LBydiSn02fkRE73Sm_KSLRqJQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/78ff5cc9-268f-4be8-ae0b-c1a07dc24852%40proxel.se>
Precedence: bulk

On 3/4/26 4:55 PM, David G. Johnston wrote:
> In evaluating the proposed change to wal_level docs in [1] I found it to 
> be undesirable, but the discussion and my own review discovered some 
> other changes that should be considered.

While I am not happy with the text before I am not sure your changes 
here really make it much better, just different, hmm.

> Since effective_wal_level now exists, Logical Replication Getting 
> Started needs to be updated.
> Add links to the main topics that the different levels apply to.
> Be explicit about the ordering of minimal, replica, and logical.
> Move the behavior of effective_wal_level to the GUC for it, leaving 
> behind just the pointer that wal_level is now just a "minimum".
Shouldn't it be:

"Ensure that <xref linkend="guc-wal-level"/> is at least replica"

and

"wal_level = replica"

as the logical replication slot may be created later?

-- 
Andreas Karlsson
Percona