Bruce Momjian wrote: > Simon Riggs wrote: > > On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 12:22 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > > > > > (wal_keep_segments can be changed without restarting, right?) > > > > > > Should we allow -1 to mean "keep all segments"? > > > > Why is that not called "max_wal_segments"? wal_keep_segments sounds like > > its been through Google translate. > > LOL, good one. > > I assume it was done so it would start with 'wal', but I see > 'max_wal_senders', which doesn't start with 'wal' and would match your > suggestion exactly. I think we should either rename 'wal_keep_segments' > or 'max_wal_senders'.
Uh, did we decide that 'wal_keep_segments' was the best name for this GUC setting? I know we shipped beta1 using that name. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
