On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 6:07 AM, Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > After thinking a bit on the subject, I have decided to submit a patch > to do $subject. This makes pg_receivewal more consistent with > pg_basebackup. This option is mainly useful for testing, something > that becomes way more doable since support for --endpos has been > added. > > Unsurprisingly, --synchronous and --no-sync are incompatible options. + <para> + By default, <command>pg_receivewal</command> flushes a WAL segment's + contents each time a feedback message is sent to the server depending + on the interval of time defined by + <literal>--status-interval</literal>. IMHO, it's okay to remove the part 'depending on the.....<literal>--status-interval</literal>'.
+ This option causes + <command>pg_receivewal</command> to not issue such flushes waiting, Did you mean 'to not issue such flush waitings'? + [ 'pg_receivewal', '-D', $stream_dir, '--synchronous', '--no-sync' ], + 'failure if --synchronous specified without --no-sync'); s/without/with -- Thanks & Regards, Kuntal Ghosh EnterpriseDB: http://www.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