Subject: Re: max_slot_wal_keep_size and wal_keep_segments
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
References: <20200701032605.GA16707@alvherre.pgsql>
From: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>
Message-ID: <ad678ce4-199f-0bd9-7aff-6ef8501dd36e@oss.nttdata.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2020 21:50:56 +0900
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:68.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20200701032605.GA16707@alvherre.pgsql>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk


On 2020/07/01 12:26, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2020-Jun-30, Fujii Masao wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>>
>> 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.

Regards,

-- 
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION