Re: postgresql.conf.sample ordering for IO, worker related GUCs

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: postgresql.conf.sample ordering for IO, worker related GUCs
Date: 2025-01-31 02:24:05
Message-ID: F486F1BC-CB17-49C4-8BF6-4F06A468AAEA@anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi

On January 30, 2025 8:55:36 PM EST, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
>> While working on polishing the AIO patchset, I was trying to figure out where
>> to fit the new GUCs. So far I had a new "top-level" #--- style section named
>> "WIP AIO GUC docs" which I suspect you all won't let me get away with.
>> There is an existing (sub-)section which already has a few related GUCs and
>> could fit AIO related ones.
>
>I think the normal theory for postgresql.conf.sample is that it should
>match the organization of config.sgml. What are you planning there?

Pretty much the same. I.e. I'm thinking that the worker stuff should be it's own subsection and that the existing IO parameters should be moved to either a new subsection or a new top level section. But I'm wondering how others think it should be structured...

Andres
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tatsuo Ishii 2025-01-31 02:25:57 Re: Add RESPECT/IGNORE NULLS and FROM FIRST/LAST options
Previous Message Nisha Moond 2025-01-31 02:13:16 Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation