Re: max_slot_wal_keep_size and wal_keep_segments

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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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