Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
> Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
>> I'd say no code changes for 8.0, now we know what's causing it. A doc
>> patch to show the limit is probably just going to annoy the translators
>> at this stage also.
> We could adjust guc.c to limit checkpoint_segments to the range 1..255
> without having to touch any translatable strings. This isn't a
> necessary change but it seems harmless ... any objections?
Or we could just fix it. After thinking a bit more, I realized that
it's not hard to push the forced-checkpoint boundary out to 2^32
segments instead of 255. That should be enough to still any complaints.
regards, tom lane