Re: Doc about how to set max_wal_senders when setting minimal wal_level
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Doc about how to set max_wal_senders when setting minimal wal_level |
Дата | |
Msg-id | YtW7WaRgD8kjcBm4@momjian.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Doc about how to set max_wal_senders when setting minimal wal_level (Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Doc about how to set max_wal_senders when setting minimal wal_level
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 09:29:20PM +0800, Japin Li wrote: > > On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 at 08:49, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.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. Okay, text added in the attached patch. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us EDB https://enterprisedb.com Indecision is a decision. Inaction is an action. Mark Batterson
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: