Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1qjVam-00BFu5-Uz for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 22 Sep 2023 02:08:28 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1qjVal-00GxHI-Cr for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 22 Sep 2023 02:08:27 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1qjVak-00GxEx-Q5 for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 22 Sep 2023 02:08:26 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([68.162.161.243]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1qjVah-006nQL-IT for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 22 Sep 2023 02:08:25 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 38M28INh837537; Thu, 21 Sep 2023 22:08:18 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Peter Geoghegan cc: Bruce Momjian , harukat@sraoss.co.jp, pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org, Andres Freund Subject: Re: BUG #18124: PG16 release note document bug in "Add build option to allow testing of small WAL segment sizes" In-reply-to: References: <18124-d363fa4873e176d6@postgresql.org> Comments: In-reply-to Peter Geoghegan message dated "Thu, 21 Sep 2023 18:55:09 -0700" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-ID: <837535.1695348498.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2023 22:08:18 -0400 Message-ID: <837536.1695348498@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk Peter Geoghegan writes: > On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 6:47 PM Bruce Momjian wrote: >> Uh, it is true that we don't have any segment sizes other than WAL, but >> I am not sure people would easily know that, so I added WAL so people >> knew. > But the commit in question added a new option that can be used to > control the relation segment size -- not the WAL segment size. > Obviously, that's what TAKATSUKA-san meant. Yeah. The release note entry is simply wrong to say it's WAL segment size. I would also argue that d3b111e32's installation.sgml changes were poorly worded, because they only say "segment size" which can easily be misunderstood, just as happened here. Better would be "relation segment size" or "table segment size". regards, tom lane