| From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: 019_replslot_limit.pl might fail due to checkpoint skipped |
| Date: | 2026-08-12 08:01:00 |
| Message-ID: | CAHGQGwF_O7ZxAdW-TRQ1K83nm9OcHyAhAaVB4bXu_j+GaskvQQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Aug 12, 2026 at 12:06 PM Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)
<kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com> wrote:
> Actually the test can pass without increasing the max_wal_size. Ultimately, we do
> not have to set both min_wal_size and max_wal_size: we enforce the CHECKPOINT
> here. My fresh brain feels that such unnecessary settings can be avoided, done
> in v2.
Thanks for updating the patch! The test changes look good to me.
I also updated the commit message and adjusted the comment for the new
test. Attached is v3.
Barring any objections, I'm thinking to commit it.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v3-REL14-0001-Stabilize-019_replslot_limit.txt | text/plain | 2.7 KB |
| v3-0001-Stabilize-019_replslot_limit.patch | application/octet-stream | 2.7 KB |
| v3-REL15-0001-Stabilize-019_replslot_limit.txt | text/plain | 2.7 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) | 2026-08-12 08:04:36 | RE: Logical replication row filter loses unchanged toasted columns |
| Previous Message | Bertrand Drouvot | 2026-08-12 07:55:21 | Offline data checksum changes can cause incorrect checksum state on standbys |