Greetings,
* David Steele (david@pgmasters.net) wrote:
> I had a look at the patch and the change and new documentation seem sensible
> to me.
Thanks!
> I think this phrase may be a bit too idiomatic:
>
> + consistent I/O load while also leaving some slop for checkpoint
>
> Perhaps just:
>
> + consistent I/O load while also leaving some time for checkpoint
Yeah, good thought, updated.
> It seems to me that the discussion about changing the wording for GUCs not
> changeable after server should be saved for another patch as long as this
> patch follows the current convention.
Agreed.
Unless there's anything further on this, I'll plan to commit it tomorrow
or Wednesday.
Thanks!
Stephen
