Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] bgwriter_lru_multiplier blurbs inconsistent

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org, Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] bgwriter_lru_multiplier blurbs inconsistent
Date: 2008-01-21 03:29:48
Message-ID: 19882.1200886188@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docspgsql-hackers
Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> writes:
> On Sun, 20 Jan 2008, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I think the main problem is the qualifying clause up front in a place
>> of prominence.  Here's a V3 try

> That one looks good to me.  These are small details but better to get it 
> right now.

OK, committed.  Back to Alvaro's original concern: is the short
description in guc.c all right, or can we improve that?

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-docs by date

Next:From: ErikDate: 2008-01-22 16:45:39
Subject: PgAdmin instead of PgAccess
Previous:From: Greg SmithDate: 2008-01-21 03:07:52
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] bgwriter_lru_multiplier blurbs inconsistent

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-01-21 03:55:11
Subject: Re: Bug in psql/enum
Previous:From: Greg SmithDate: 2008-01-21 03:07:52
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] bgwriter_lru_multiplier blurbs inconsistent

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group