Re: Track in pg_replication_slots the reason why slots conflict?
От | Michael Paquier |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Track in pg_replication_slots the reason why slots conflict? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | ZZS64loUZzEJPhiZ@paquier.xyz обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Track in pg_replication_slots the reason why slots conflict? (Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Track in pg_replication_slots the reason why slots conflict?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jan 02, 2024 at 02:07:58PM +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote: > + <literal>wal_level_insufficient</literal> means that the > + <xref linkend="guc-wal-level"/> is insufficient on the primary > + server. > > I'd prefer "primary_wal_level" instead of "wal_level_insufficient". I think it's > better to directly mention it is linked to the primary (without the need to refer > to the documentation) and that the fact that it is "insufficient" is more or less > implicit. > > Basically I think that with "primary_wal_level" one would need to refer to the doc > less frequently than with "wal_level_insufficient". I can see your point, but wal_level_insufficient speaks a bit more to me because of its relationship with the GUC setting. Something like wal_level_insufficient_on_primary may speak better, but that's also quite long. I'm OK with what the patch does. + as invalidated. Possible values are: + <itemizedlist spacing="compact"> Higher-level nit: indentation seems to be one space off here. -- Michael
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: