On Wed, 6 Apr 2022 at 01:42, Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 at 16:02, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 10:58 AM Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
> > >> Makes sense. I will do this soon if nobody objects.
> > >>
> > >> I'm mildly uncomfortable with the phrase "WAL records generated over
> > >> the delay period" because it seems a bit imprecise, but I'm not sure
> > >> what would be better and I think the meaning is clear.
> > >
> > > Maybe "during" instead of "over"? But I'm not sure that's the part you're referring to?
> >
> > Yeah, something like that, maybe.
>
> I share your discomfort with the wording. How about:
>
> WAL records must be kept on standby until they are ready to be applied.
> Therefore, longer delays will result in a greater accumulation of WAL files,
> increasing disk space requirements for the standby's <filename>pg_wal</>
> directory.
*must be kept on the standby
--
Thom
