On 2020/02/19 21:46 Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@oss.nttdata.com>: >> I agree to the former, I think RecoveryWalInterval works well enough. >RecoveryWalInterval sounds confusing to me...
IMHO as a user, I prefer RecoveryRetrieveRetryInterval because it's easy to understand this wait_event is related to the parameter 'wal_retrieve_retry_interval'. Also from the point of balance, the explanation of RecoveryRetrieveRetryInterval is lengthy, but I sometimes feel explanations of wait_events in the manual are so simple that it's hard to understand well. > Waiting when WAL data is not available from any kind of sources > (local, archive or stream) before trying again to retrieve WAL data, I think 'local' means pg_wal here, but the comment on WaitForWALToBecomeAvailable() says checking pg_wal in standby mode is 'not documented', so I'm a little bit worried that users may be confused. Regards, -- Torikoshi Atsushi
