Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Lower *_freeze_max_age minimum values.

Cc'ing -hackers.

Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2015-09-24 10:37:33 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:

> > Should this patch not have also touched the per-table limits in
> > reloptions.c?
>
> Hm. I guess that'd make sense. It's not really related to the goal of
> making it realistic to test multixact/clog truncation, but it's less
> confusing if consistent.

Yeah, agreed.

> > and I found places in create_table.sgml that claim these variables can be
> > set to zero. You didn't break that with this patch, but it's still wrong.
>
> Seems to have been "broken" back in 834a6da4f7 - the old table based
> approach doesn't seem to have imposed lower limits. I'm not really sure
> whether making the limits consistent and updating the docs or removing
> them alltogether is the better approach.

I'm surprised the error has survived this long. Without checking I
can't say what's the best solution either, but I would opt for
documenting the limits we have -- if we want to change them back to 0 I
say that merits its own discussion.

--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services