Re: doc: clarify wal_sender_shutdown_timeout behavior for small values

On Fri, Jul 17, 2026 at 6:01 PM Ian Lawrence Barwick <barwick(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Rather than warn against "too small" values, which raises the question of how
> you define "too small", I think it'd be better to note that you'd want a
> value which is sufficiently high to ensure replication terminates properly under
> normal circumstances (which will vary according to environment etc., so it will
> be up to the user to work out what is best for them).
>
> I took the liberty of revising your patch a bit (easier than trying to
> describe suggested
> changes in an email), which:
>
> - moves the description of what a value of 0 does to the first
> paragraph, which handles
> what various values do
> - revises the caution about small values to a note about selecting sufficiently
> high values (per above)
> - (nitpick) changed "nonnegative" to "non-negative", as that's the
> majority variant in
> the docs

This is docs, not error message, but as error message style guide suggests,
the word "non-negative" basically should be avoided since it's ambiguous
about whether it accepts zero?

If we document what a value of 0 means, isn't it better to add a brief
description about the value 0 to postgresql.conf.sample and guc_parameters.dat
as well?

Regards,

--
Fujii Masao