From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: vacuum_defer_cleanup_age |
Date: | 2010-06-11 13:22:14 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTimq9Jb9ghqvvqxhSLFkcu1AlLND9aTXchEMX5n7@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 7:25 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
<heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> Yeah, there's clearly a mismatch. I think "Hot Standby" is the right place,
> altough you could argue that it should be together with
> vacuum_freeze_min_age and vacuum_freeze_table_age too.
>
> We seem to be missing an entry for "Write-Ahead Log / Hot Standby" in the
> config_group_names list in guc.c. hot_standby GUC marked to beling in
> WAL_SETTINGS in guc.c.
>
> What's the policy with that, should all the sections in the sample config
> file and docs have a corresponding enum in config_group_names? I guess they
> should, but many of them seem to be missing. There's no separate entry in
> config_group_names for "Write-Ahead Log / Archiving", "Resource Usage /
> Cost-Based Vacuum Delay" and "Resource Usage / Asynchronous Behavior"
> either, for example.
>
> Should I add entries in the enum for all the missing ones?
+1. This seems sensible.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-06-11 13:22:51 | Re: Proposal for 9.1: WAL streaming from WAL buffers |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-06-11 13:16:09 | Re: warning message in standby |