From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Pól Ua Laoínecháin <linehanp@tcd.ie>
Cc: pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: The order of postgresql.conf parameters is potentially confusing. Very minor cosmetic bug or "niggle"!
Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2021 12:39:15 -0400
Message-ID: <2091798.1630514355@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAF4RT5QhSpxFYtM-nPCgrnwf+t=ExvzH8OWEP27=B8QPXs7FGw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAF4RT5QhSpxFYtM-nPCgrnwf+t=ExvzH8OWEP27=B8QPXs7FGw@mail.gmail.com>
=?UTF-8?B?UMOzbCBVYSBMYW/DrW5lY2jDoWlu?= <linehanp@tcd.ie> writes:
> Hardly a major issue, but in my opinion, it is *_totally_* illogical
> to have the max_wal_size on the line above the min_wal_size. I propose
> that this should be changed!
It's probably that way on the basis of alphabetical order.
We very often have debates on whether documentation lists should be
strictly alphabetical or not. Neither side has entirely won the
day, but I'm not sure the case for "min before max" is strong
enough to justify non-alphabetical here.
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, linehanp@tcd.ie, pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: The order of postgresql.conf parameters is potentially confusing. Very minor cosmetic bug or "niggle"!
In-Reply-To: <2091798.1630514355@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox