On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 2:54 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
<heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> Robert Haas wrote:
>> I've realized another problem with this patch. standby_keep_segments
>> only controls the number of segments that we keep around for purposes
>> of streaming: it doesn't affect archiving at all. And of course, a
>> standby server based on archiving is every bit as much of a standby
>> server as one that uses streaming replication. So at a minimum, the
>> name of this GUC is very confusing.
>
> Hmm, I guess streaming_keep_segments would be more accurate. Somehow
> doesn't feel as good otherwise, though. Any other suggestions?
I sort of feel like the correct description is something like
num_extra_retained_wal_segments, but that's sort of long. The actual
behavior is not tied to streaming, although the use case is.
...Robert