Re: doc: clarify wal_sender_shutdown_timeout behavior for small values
От
Fujii Masao
Тема
Re: doc: clarify wal_sender_shutdown_timeout behavior for small values
Дата
Msg-id
CAHGQGwGU+rj8G9iYcMejW8OTbKxgyYp7YiHFvVR9FkMbBpCP-w@mail.gmail.com
Ответ на
Re: doc: clarify wal_sender_shutdown_timeout behavior for small values (Ian Lawrence Barwick)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
Re: doc: clarify wal_sender_shutdown_timeout behavior for small values Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.com>
On Fri, Jul 17, 2026 at 6:01 PM Ian Lawrence Barwick wrote: > Rather than warn against "too small" values, which raises the question of how > you define "too small", I think it'd be better to note that you'd want a > value which is sufficiently high to ensure replication terminates properly under > normal circumstances (which will vary according to environment etc., so it will > be up to the user to work out what is best for them). > > I took the liberty of revising your patch a bit (easier than trying to > describe suggested > changes in an email), which: > > - moves the description of what a value of 0 does to the first > paragraph, which handles > what various values do > - revises the caution about small values to a note about selecting sufficiently > high values (per above) > - (nitpick) changed "nonnegative" to "non-negative", as that's the > majority variant in > the docs This is docs, not error message, but as error message style guide suggests, the word "non-negative" basically should be avoided since it's ambiguous about whether it accepts zero? If we document what a value of 0 means, isn't it better to add a brief description about the value 0 to postgresql.conf.sample and guc_parameters.dat as well? Regards, -- Fujii Masao
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления
От: Atsushi Ogawa
Дата: