| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, harukat(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #18124: PG16 release note document bug in "Add build option to allow testing of small WAL segment sizes" |
| Date: | 2023-09-26 16:09:01 |
| Message-ID: | ZRMCHUh3S5UJYSpN@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 06:32:48PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 10:45:04AM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 2023-09-21 22:08:18 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> writes:
> > > > On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 6:47 PM Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> > > >> Uh, it is true that we don't have any segment sizes other than WAL, but
> > > >> I am not sure people would easily know that, so I added WAL so people
> > > >> knew.
> > >
> > > > But the commit in question added a new option that can be used to
> > > > control the relation segment size -- not the WAL segment size.
> > > > Obviously, that's what TAKATSUKA-san meant.
> > >
> > > Yeah. The release note entry is simply wrong to say it's WAL segment size.
> >
> > Agreed. Bruce are you committing that bit?
>
> Yes, I will try to do it tomorrow.
Patch applied.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
Only you can decide what is important to you.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kyle MacMillan | 2023-09-26 23:14:06 | md5 password valid and invalid after upgrading |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2023-09-26 14:02:25 | Re: PostgreSQL's processes blocking each other are not detected as deadlock |