Hi Michael.
IMHO, if each supported version behaves as described in this paragraph,
then the patch should also be applied to the documentation for each version.
Best regards,
Dmitriy Kuzmin
чт, 25 февр. 2021 г. в 12:41, Michael Paquier :
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 11:16:57PM +1000, Dmitriy Kuzmi
On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 11:16:57PM +1000, Dmitriy Kuzmin wrote:
> Will this change be made in the documentation for all Postgresql versions?
This wording has been introduced back in 2011 as of b186523, and
nobody complained about that until now, so I did not see a strong need
to back-patch it. Wo
Thanks.
Will this change be made in the documentation for all Postgresql versions?
Best regards,
Dmitriy Kuzmin
ср, 24 февр. 2021 г. в 12:19, Michael Paquier :
> On Sun, Feb 21, 2021 at 09:21:41PM -0300, Euler Taveira wrote:
> > LGTM.
>
> Thanks, applied.
> --
> Michael
>
On Sun, Feb 21, 2021 at 09:21:41PM -0300, Euler Taveira wrote:
> LGTM.
Thanks, applied.
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Sun, Feb 21, 2021, at 3:58 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> That's an idea. While looking at that I found confusing that the
> sentence "Setting this parameter to zero disables status updates
> completely" was completely separate of the rest, where it sounds like
> even forced messages are disabled
On Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 07:49:21PM +1000, Dmitriy Kuzmin wrote:
> I suppose it could be something like this:
> "...Setting this parameter to zero disables status updates on a scheduled
> basis completely. However there are certain conditions when updates are
> still being sent. For example when sta
Hi Michael.
> The docs say only that:
> "Updates are sent each time the write or flush positions change, or at
> least as often as specified by this parameter."
A bit further it says "Setting this parameter to zero disables status
updates completely."
> So it could make sense to complete a bit
On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 07:24:04AM +, PG Doc comments form wrote:
> The documentation says that setting wal_receiver_status_interval to 0
> disable updates of replication status completely. However walreceiver keep
> sending status in some cases. For example, when startup has finished
> process
