From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | t(dot)katsumata1122(at)gmail(dot)com |
Cc: | pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Behavior of recovery_target_inclusive. |
Date: | 2017-10-23 14:05:49 |
Message-ID: | CAB7nPqQ29vBFsENQg6V_G4QQmb9zP6beYOycAMusJUNF-Gj5rg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs |
On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 10:27 PM, <t(dot)katsumata1122(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> At "recovery_target_inclusive (boolean)", nothing is mentioned about
> "recovery_target_lsn".
> It should be fixed, since "recovery_target_lsn" is affected by the value of
> "recovery_target_inclusive".
>
> Could you check this?
Apologies. You are right, this is a documentation bug and should be
fixed. Attached is a patch to address the problem. The trend on the
documentation page for recovery parameters is to list the options
alphabetically, so recovery_target_lsn comes first.
--
Michael
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
recovery-lsn-doc.patch | application/octet-stream | 980 bytes |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tomonari Katsumata | 2017-10-24 00:43:45 | Re: Behavior of recovery_target_inclusive. |
Previous Message | t.katsumata1122 | 2017-10-23 13:27:57 | Behavior of recovery_target_inclusive. |