From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: max_slot_wal_keep_size and wal_keep_segments |
Date: | 2020-07-17 09:11:36 |
Message-ID: | efffe8f2-63ea-fe8c-68db-244aa27a63ef@oss.nttdata.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2020/07/14 20:30, David Steele wrote:
> On 7/14/20 12:00 AM, Fujii Masao wrote:
>>
>> The patch was no longer applied cleanly because of recent commit.
>> So I updated the patch. Attached.
>>
>> Barring any objection, I will commit this patch.
>
> This doesn't look right:
>
> + the <xref linkend="guc-wal-keep-size"/> most recent megabytes
> + WAL files plus one WAL file are
>
> How about:
>
> + <xref linkend="guc-wal-keep-size"/> megabytes of
> + WAL files plus one WAL file are
Thanks for the comment! Isn't it better to keep "most recent" part?
If so, what about either of the followings?
1. <xref linkend="guc-wal-keep-size"/> megabytes of WAL files plus
one WAL file that were most recently generated are kept all time.
2. <xref linkend="guc-wal-keep-size"/> megabytes + <xref linkend="guc-wal-segment-size"> bytes
of WAL files that were most recently generated are kept all time.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2020-07-17 09:18:17 | Re: Parallel Seq Scan vs kernel read ahead |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2020-07-17 08:46:30 | Re: renaming configure.in to configure.ac |