Greetings, * Alvaro Herrera (alvhe...@alvh.no-ip.org) wrote: > On 2020-Dec-10, Stephen Frost wrote: > > * Laurenz Albe (laurenz.a...@cybertec.at) wrote: > > > On Tue, 2020-12-08 at 17:29 +0000, Bossart, Nathan wrote: > > > > +1 to setting checkpoint_completion_target to 0.9 by default. > > > > > > +1 for changing the default or getting rid of it, as Tom suggested. > > > > Attached is a patch to change it from a GUC to a compile-time #define > > which is set to 0.9, with accompanying documentation updates. > > I think we should leave a doc stub or at least an <indexterm>, to let > people know the GUC has been removed rather than just making it > completely invisible. (Maybe piggyback on the stuff in [1]?) > > [1] > https://postgr.es/m/CAGRY4nyA=jmBNa4LVwgGO1GyO-RnFmfkesddpT_uO+3=mot...@mail.gmail.com
Yes, I agree, and am involved in that thread as well- currently waiting feedback from others about the proposed approach. Getting a few more people looking at that thread and commenting on it would really help us be able to move forward. Thanks, Stephen
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
