Re: BUG #17077: about three parameters in postgresql 13.3 - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Bharath Rupireddy
Subject Re: BUG #17077: about three parameters in postgresql 13.3
Date
Msg-id CALj2ACWNacYVcZx4evp+KzQWXsXcWzRE9eewjpAJxNB+xCsKWA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: BUG #17077: about three parameters in postgresql 13.3  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: BUG #17077: about three parameters in postgresql 13.3  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-bugs
On Sat, Jul 17, 2021 at 7:50 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> "leiyanliang@highgo.com" <leiyanliang@highgo.com> writes:
> > I want to know: this bug report is a problem or not ?
>
> The code is operating as designed.  It does seem odd that there's no
> mention of these variables in the documentation, though.

I think the point that the 3 GUCs have no explanation in the docs but
still show up in the pg_settings was discussed at [1]. There, we
wanted to add GUC_NO_SHOW_ALL for 3 of them. I still would prefer it
because the 3 GUCs will only be used internally(?).

[1] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/237342.1620491116%40sss.pgh.pa.us

Regards,
Bharath Rupireddy.



pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #17103: WAL segments are not removed after exceeding max_slot_wal_keep_size
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #17077: about three parameters in postgresql 13.3