05.12.2018 4:04, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 01:24:22AM +0300, Maksim Milyutin wrote:
Yeah, I think the notion *remote_flush level* is more appropriate especially
in the context of sync replication. Within this context maybe it makes sense
to replace the word *level* to *value* in description of *flush_lag*?
I am not sure that this is an improvement. Anyway, I have committed
your original patch as that's clearly a mistake and back-patched down to
v10.
Ok, thanks.
--
Regards,
Maksim Milyutin
