On Thu, Nov 9, 2023 at 12:38 PM Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 09, 2023 at 05:04:28PM +1100, Peter Smith wrote: > > Having a GUC hook for the "max_slot_wal_keep_size" seemed OK to me. If > > the user overrides a GUC value (admittedly, maybe there is no reason > > why they would want to) then at least the hook will give an error, > > rather than us silently overwriting the user's value with -1. > > > > So, patch v4 LGTM, except it is better to include a test case. > > Where's this v4? >
I think it is in an email[1]. I can take care of this unless we see some opposition to this idea. [1] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20231102.115834.1012152975995247837.horikyota.ntt%40gmail.com -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
