Installation issue
The following documentation comment has been logged on the website: Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/12/bug-reporting.html Description: Now i installed postgresql but i am facing error like "There was been an error unknown error while ruining c:/WINDOWS/system32//whoami... please help to me solve this issue
Re: Adding xreflable
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 01:41:41PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 2020-05-22 18:45, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Ugh, I see what you mean. I have read doc/src/sgml/README.links many > > times and still get confused. What you are saying is that if there is > > no xreflabel on a target, you can get the chapter/section via or > > specify text via . But, if there is an xreflabel on the target, > > you can't get the chapter/section anymore --- you can only get the > > xreflabel via , or specify text via , right? > > I think that's right. > > > I added 13 xreflabels in commits 85af628da5 and 75fcdd2ae2. What I am > > thinking of doing is to look at all references to the id's associated > > with those xreflabels and remove the xreflabel if the chapter/section > > is required, and if not, convert to where the link text > > matches the xreflabel. Does that sound like a good plan? > > Both of those commits should be reverted. > > I don't quite understand your plan, but if you mean, check whether anyone > else links to the id in question, that doesn't sound sustainable. A new > link could be added at any time in the future. > > I think the release notes should either just use a plain to link and > use whatever generated text it gets, or if you don't like that, use . > Which is basically what it was before, IIRC. I can adjust things, but what logic are we following? Before my patch, sepgsql had an xreflabel, and vacuumlo did not. I would like to have a documented policy of where we should have xreflabels, and where not, and I can then adjust things to match. I don't mind using but it is confusing to be able to reference xreflabels in some places and be required to use link in others. -- Bruce Momjian https://momjian.us EnterpriseDB https://enterprisedb.com The usefulness of a cup is in its emptiness, Bruce Lee
Re: max_wal_size
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 12:21:14PM +0300, p.luza...@postgrespro.ru wrote: > WAL |---|-+-|-+-|-+-> > >a b c > CP +-+ +-+ +-+ > b e b e b e > > Checkpointer process for point A starts at a(b) and ends at a(e). > At the end of the work, CP makes a WAL record(plus symbol on WAL line). > > Back to the max_wal_size description: > "Maximum size to let the WAL grow to between automatic WAL checkpoints." > > As I understand now, this is true when we talk about the checkpoint as a > process. > "Maximum size to let the WAL grow to between a(b) and b(e), between b(b) and c > (e), etc". What if we say: "Maximum size to let the WAL grow during automatic WAL checkpoints." That highlights the "process" part. -- Bruce Momjian https://momjian.us EnterpriseDB https://enterprisedb.com The usefulness of a cup is in its emptiness, Bruce Lee
Re: max_wal_size
Hello, On 02.06.2020 22:35, Bruce Momjian wrote: On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 12:21:14PM +0300, p.luza...@postgrespro.ru wrote: WAL |---|-+-|-+-|-+-> a b c CP +-+ +-+ +-+ b e b e b e Checkpointer process for point A starts at a(b) and ends at a(e). At the end of the work, CP makes a WAL record(plus symbol on WAL line). Back to the max_wal_size description: "Maximum size to let the WAL grow to between automatic WAL checkpoints." As I understand now, this is true when we talk about the checkpoint as a process. "Maximum size to let the WAL grow to between a(b) and b(e), between b(b) and c (e), etc". What if we say: "Maximum size to let the WAL grow during automatic WAL checkpoints." That highlights the "process" part. Really, "during" is associated with the process, while "between" with points. If there is no objection, simpe patch attached. - Pavel Luzanov Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com The Russian Postgres Company diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/config.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/config.sgml index 4eef970d41..7398806203 100644 --- a/doc/src/sgml/config.sgml +++ b/doc/src/sgml/config.sgml @@ -3085,7 +3085,7 @@ include_dir 'conf.d' -Maximum size to let the WAL grow to between automatic WAL +Maximum size to let the WAL grow during automatic WAL checkpoints. This is a soft limit; WAL size can exceed max_wal_size under special circumstances, such as heavy load, a failing archive_command, or a high
Re: wal_init_zero and wal_recycle
On 2020/06/02 14:25, Fujii Masao wrote: On 2020/05/29 13:13, Fujii Masao wrote: On 2020/05/28 8:43, Thomas Munro wrote: On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 7:09 PM Simon Riggs wrote: On Wed, 27 May 2020 at 04:27, Fujii Masao wrote: Hi, The group of wal_init_zero and wal_recycle is WAL_SETTINGS in guc.c, but their descriptions are located in "19.6. Replication"/"19.6.1. Sending Servers" section. This seems a documentation bug. They should be located in "19.5. Write Ahead Log"/"19.5.1. Settings". Thought? +1 Thanks! Patch attached. Since they are located just before wal_buffers in postgresql.conf.sample, I moved the descriptions of them also just before that of wal_buffers in "Write Ahead Log"/"Settings" section. Barring any objection, I will commit this patch. Pushed. Thanks! Regards, -- Fujii Masao Advanced Computing Technology Center Research and Development Headquarters NTT DATA CORPORATION
