On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 02:51:15PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 01:08:44AM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 8:38 AM, Marko Tiikkaja <ma...@joh.to> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > Myself and others found this statement in the documentation about $SUBJECT > > > very confusing: "max_standby_archive_delay must be kept large in this > > > case, > > > because delayed WAL files might already contain entries that conflict with > > > the desired standby queries.". After a chat with Andres I've tried to > > > make > > > it clearer what said statement tries to convey. > > > > > > Did I succeed? > > > > Don't we need to increase also max_standby_streaming_delay > > in the case that you mentioned in the patch? When the standby > > successfully reconnects to the master, lots of WAL files would > > be streamed and they might already have WAL entries that > > conflict with standby queries. No? > > I have developed the attached doc patch to improve the wording on this > topic.
Patch applied. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. + -- Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list (pgsql-docs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs
