Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2020 10:54:28 -0400
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: max_slot_wal_keep_size and wal_keep_segments
Message-ID: <20200701145428.GA7427@alvherre.pgsql>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <ad678ce4-199f-0bd9-7aff-6ef8501dd36e@oss.nttdata.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Precedence: bulk

On 2020-Jul-01, Fujii Masao wrote:

> On 2020/07/01 12:26, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > On 2020-Jun-30, Fujii Masao wrote:
> > 
> > > When I talked about max_slot_wal_keep_size as new feature in v13
> > > at the conference, I received the question like "Why are the units of
> > > setting values in max_slot_wal_keep_size and wal_keep_segments different?"
> > > from audience. That difference looks confusing for users and
> > > IMO it's better to use the same unit for them. Thought?
> > 
> > Do we still need wal_keep_segments for anything?
> 
> Yeah, personally I like wal_keep_segments because its setting is very
> simple and no extra operations on replication slots are necessary.

Okay.  In that case I +1 the idea of renaming to wal_keep_size.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services