On Fri, 2004-12-17 at 00:12, Tom Lane wrote: > Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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.
Sorry for the delay in replying. Thanks for considering this further. If it can be fixed in 8.0, that would be good. If this means any risk or non-portability, then I would defer. -- Best Regards, Simon Riggs ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
