On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 13:52 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 1:44 PM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 12:22 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >> >
> >> > (wal_keep_segments can be changed without restarting, right?)
> >>
> >> Should we allow -1 to mean "keep all segments"?
> >
> > Why is that not called "max_wal_segments"? wal_keep_segments sounds like
> > its been through Google translate.
>
> Because it's not a maximum?
I see the thinking, but why would you ever set it to be something that
is *less* than the existing numbers? That would be pointless and indeed,
does nothing. The only time you touch it at all is when you set it to be
a value higher than the number of files that would normally be kept, and
when that is the case it *will* be the maximum.
So I say, max_wal_segments = 0 (default) meaning no limit, we just
rotate as needed. We put a comment in the docs to say that if a value is
selected less than 2*checkpoint_segments+1 then the value is overridden.
-- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
