| From: | Andy Fan <zhihuifan1213(at)163(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Document for wal_log_hints |
| Date: | 2024-11-19 02:19:04 |
| Message-ID: | 87zflw7yp3.fsf@163.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> writes:
> On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 09:03:57AM +0800, Andy Fan wrote:
>> So if data checksums is enabled, nothing can be tested when turning
>> wal_log_hints on/off.
>> @@ -3319,7 +3319,7 @@ include_dir 'conf.d'
>> If data checksums are enabled, hint bit updates are always WAL-logged
>> and this setting is ignored. You can use this setting to test how much
>> extra WAL-logging would occur if your database had data checksums
>> - enabled.
>> + disabled.
>> </para>
>
> It seems to me that the point if that enabling wal_log_hints is able
> to emulate how much WAL would be generated should data checksums be
> *enabled*. So the original text looks correct to me.
OK.. your explainatin looks good to me. so we should keep the original
one. Thanks for the check!
--
Best Regards
Andy Fan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Yugo NAGATA | 2024-11-19 02:29:07 | Re: Doc: typo in config.sgml |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2024-11-19 01:47:53 | Re: per backend I/O statistics |