From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Clarify old WAL files cannot be removed until they are summarized |
Date: | 2024-12-12 15:08:06 |
Message-ID: | 87716933-16fc-4b79-a4f6-59ffc06a76a1@oss.nttdata.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs |
On 2024/12/11 9:18, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 18, 2024 at 02:25:15AM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
>> The documentation in wal.sgml explains that old WAL files cannot be
>> removed or recycled until they are archived (when WAL archiving is used)
>> or replicated (when using replication slots). However, it did not
>> mention that, similarly, old WAL files are also kept until they are summarized
>> if WAL summarization is enabled. Attached patch adds that clarification to
>> the documentation. Thought?
>>
>> @@ -643,6 +643,8 @@
>> until the situation is resolved. A slow or failed standby server that
>> uses a replication slot will have the same effect (see
>> <xref linkend="streaming-replication-slots"/>).
>> + Similarly, if WAL summarization is enabled, old segments are kept
>> + until they are summarized.
>> </para>
>
> Sounds like a good idea to me. I'd suggest to add a link to
> runtime-config-wal-summarization as it is the first reference to WAL
> summarization in this file.
Yes, that sounds like a good idea. I've updated the patch accordingly.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v2-0001-doc-Clarify-old-WAL-files-are-kept-until-they-are.patch | text/plain | 1.4 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2024-12-13 00:12:12 | Re: Clarify old WAL files cannot be removed until they are summarized |
Previous Message | PG Doc comments form | 2024-12-12 14:33:25 | docs are incomplete or wrong... |