From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: wal_init_zero and wal_recycle |
Date: | 2020-05-29 04:13:34 |
Message-ID: | ee25c1cc-624b-1043-bd77-f6a9262a1b97@oss.nttdata.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs |
On 2020/05/28 8:43, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 7:09 PM Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 May 2020 at 04:27, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> The group of wal_init_zero and wal_recycle is WAL_SETTINGS in guc.c,
>>> but their descriptions are located in "19.6. Replication"/"19.6.1. Sending
>>> Servers" section. This seems a documentation bug. They should be located
>>> in "19.5. Write Ahead Log"/"19.5.1. Settings". Thought?
>>
>>
>> +1
Thanks! Patch attached.
Since they are located just before wal_buffers in postgresql.conf.sample,
I moved the descriptions of them also just before that of wal_buffers
in "Write Ahead Log"/"Settings" section.
BTW, while reading guc.c, I found the GUC context of wal_recycle is
PGC_SUSET. But isn't it better to set it to PGC_SIGHUP because wal_recycle
doesn't affect any backends? Basically checkpointer and startup process
use wal_recycle.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
wal_guc_docs.patch | text/plain | 3.8 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | PG Doc comments form | 2020-05-29 05:55:57 | Get original view definition without modification |
Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2020-05-28 14:46:39 | Re: max_wal_size |