| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: max_slot_wal_keep_size and wal_keep_segments |
| Date: | 2020-07-01 03:26:05 |
| Message-ID: | 20200701032605.GA16707@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2020-Jun-30, Fujii Masao wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When I talked about max_slot_wal_keep_size as new feature in v13
> at the conference, I received the question like "Why are the units of
> setting values in max_slot_wal_keep_size and wal_keep_segments different?"
> from audience. That difference looks confusing for users and
> IMO it's better to use the same unit for them. Thought?
Do we still need wal_keep_segments for anything? Maybe we should
consider removing that functionality instead ... and even if we don't
remove it in 13, then what is the point of renaming it only to remove it
shortly after?
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2020-07-01 03:28:39 | Re: Intermittent BRIN failures on hyrax and lousyjack |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2020-07-01 02:03:46 | HashAgg's batching counter starts at 0, but Hash's starts at 1. |