Amit Kapila <[email protected]> writes:
> Yeah, this sounds clear but shall we consider using
> max_retention_duration like: "Retention is re-enabled because the
> apply process has caught up with the publisher within the configured
> max_retention_duration.". We can have a single message if we don't
> want to specify the value of max_retention_duration or simply skip
> adding max_retention_duration.
That wording sounds good to me. I think you could leave out
the mention of max_retention_duration, but I won't fight if
people prefer to include it.
regards, tom lane
