Re: BUG #18124: PG16 release note document bug in "Add build option to allow testing of small WAL segment sizes"

Hi,

On 2023-09-21 22:08:18 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> writes:
> > On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 6:47 PM Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> >> Uh, it is true that we don't have any segment sizes other than WAL, but
> >> I am not sure people would easily know that, so I added WAL so people
> >> knew.
>
> > But the commit in question added a new option that can be used to
> > control the relation segment size -- not the WAL segment size.
> > Obviously, that's what TAKATSUKA-san meant.
>
> Yeah. The release note entry is simply wrong to say it's WAL segment size.

Agreed. Bruce are you committing that bit?

> I would also argue that d3b111e32's installation.sgml changes
> were poorly worded, because they only say "segment size" which can
> easily be misunderstood, just as happened here. Better would be
> "relation segment size" or "table segment size".

Hm. Yea. I copied the language from --with-segsize, but there there's
subsequent sentences that do clarify what the option relates to. I prefer
"relation" over "table" as it affects indexes as well.

Pushed that adjustment.

Greetings,

Andres Freund