On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 5:10 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 4, 2025 at 3:11 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Aug 4, 2025 at 11:46 AM shveta malik <shveta.ma...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > 7) > > > Shall we rename 'max_conflict_retention_duration' to > > > 'max_conflict_info_retention_duration' as the latter one is more > > > clear? > > > > > > > Before bikeshedding on the name of this option, I would like us to > > once again consider whether we should provide this option at > > subscription-level or GUC? > > > > Now that we decided that we would like to go with the subscription > option. The other alternative to name this new option could be > max_retention_duration. The explanation should clarify that it is used > with the retain_dead_tuples option. I think the other proposed names > appear a bit long to me. >
'max_retention_duration' looks good to me. thanks Shveta
