On 2020-Jul-01, Bruce Momjian wrote: > We have the following wal*size GUC settings: > > SELECT name FROM pg_settings WHERE name LIKE '%wal%size%'; > name > ------------------------ > max_slot_wal_keep_size > max_wal_size > min_wal_size > wal_block_size > wal_segment_size > > Does wal_keep_size make sense here?
I think it does. What do you think? Are you suggesting that "keep_wal_size" is better, since it's more in line with min/max? I lean towards no. (I think it's okay to conceptually separate these three options from wal_block_size, since that's a compile time option and thus it's an introspective GUC rather than actual configuration, but as I recall that argument does not hold for wal_segment_size. But at one point, even that one was an introspective GUC too.) -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
