Re: Doc about how to set max_wal_senders when setting minimal wal_level

From: Japin Li <japinli(at)hotmail(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Doc about how to set max_wal_senders when setting minimal wal_level
Date: 2022-07-15 13:29:20
Message-ID: MEYP282MB1669E34DF43FD3A0008FB76EB68B9@MEYP282MB1669.AUSP282.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 at 08:49, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 5, 2022 at 08:02:33PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> "Precondition" is an overly fancy word that makes things less clear
>> not more so. Does it mean that setting wal_level = minimal will fail
>> if you don't do these other things, or does it just mean that you
>> won't be getting the absolute minimum WAL volume? If the former,
>> I think it'd be better to say something like "To set wal_level to minimal,
>> you must also set [these variables], which has the effect of disabling
>> both WAL archiving and streaming replication."
>
> I have created the attached patch to try to improve this text.

IMO we can add the following sentence for wal_level description, since
if wal_level = minimal and max_wal_senders > 0, we cannot start the database.

To set wal_level to minimal, you must also set max_wal_senders to 0,
which has the effect of disabling both WAL archiving and streaming
replication.

--
Regrads,
Japin Li.
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co.,Ltd.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message osumi.takamichi@fujitsu.com 2022-07-15 13:43:14 RE: [BUG] Logical replication failure "ERROR: could not map filenode "base/13237/442428" to relation OID" with catalog modifying txns
Previous Message Tom Lane 2022-07-15 13:28:25 Re: EINTR in ftruncate()