Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 1:44 PM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 12:22 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>>> (wal_keep_segments can be changed without restarting, right?)
>>> Should we allow -1 to mean "keep all segments"?
>> Why is that not called "max_wal_segments"? wal_keep_segments sounds like
>> its been through Google translate.
> Because it's not a maximum?
Yeah, min_wal_segments or something would make sense. It sounds about as
good or bad as wal_keep_segments to me.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Heikki Linnakangas||Date: 2010-04-30 18:39:19|
|Subject: Re: pg_start_backup and pg_stop_backup Re: Re: [COMMITTERS]
pgsql: Make CheckRequiredParameterValues() depend upon correct|
|Previous:||From: Dimitri Fontaine||Date: 2010-04-30 18:22:00|
|Subject: Re: pg_migrator to /contrib in a later 9.0 beta|