| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Ian Barwick <ian(dot)barwick(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Minor comment fix for pg_config_manual.h |
| Date: | 2018-12-28 01:41:43 |
| Message-ID: | 20181228014143.GE3210@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 09:36:57AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> like the attached perhaps? At the same time I am thinking about
> reformulating the second sentence as well..
>
> /*
> - * This is default value for wal_segment_size to be used at initdb when run
> - * without --walsegsize option. Must be a valid segment size.
> + * This is the default value for wal_segment_size to be used when initdb is run
> + * without the --wal-segsize option. It must be a valid segment size.
> */
> #define DEFAULT_XLOG_SEG_SIZE (16*1024*1024)
So, any objections with this change? If somebody has a better
wording, please feel free to chime in.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-12-28 02:26:35 | Re: plpgsql plugin - stmt_beg/end is not called for top level block of statements |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-12-28 01:30:27 | Re: Offline enabling/disabling of data checksums |