Hi,

On Tue, 4 Aug 2026 at 13:55, Ayush Tiwari <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Tue, 4 Aug 2026 at 12:32, Nazir Bilal Yavuz <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>> > By default the request is now limited to the whole segments that fit
>> within
>> > max_wal_size, and force => true bypasses that when you really do want a
>> bigger
>> > warm-up. A NOTICE is issued only when an explicit request is reduced; a
>> plain
>> > no-argument call stays quiet.
>>
>> +    if (!force)
>> +    {
>> +        int64        maxsegs = XLogMBVarToSegs(max_wal_size_mb,
>> +                                            wal_segment_size);
>> +
>> +        if (nsegs > maxsegs)
>> +        {
>> +            /*
>> +             * Only report the reduction for an explicit request; the
>> default
>> +             * (min_wal_size) is expected to fit within max_wal_size.
>> +             */
>> +            if (!PG_ARGISNULL(0))
>> +                ereport(NOTICE,
>> +                        (errmsg("WAL preallocation request was reduced
>> to fit "
>> +                                "within \"max_wal_size\""),
>> +                         errdetail("Only whole WAL segments fitting
>> within "
>> +                                   "\"max_wal_size\" will be
>> preallocated."),
>> +                         errhint("Call pg_wal_preallocate() with
>> \"force\" set to true "
>> +                                 "to bypass this limit.")));
>> +            nsegs = maxsegs;
>> +        }
>> +    }
>>
>> I think it is not correct to reduce the request to fit within
>> max_wal_size. User wants to do something but you change the request
>> without any confirmation. I think you should reject the request if
>> 'bytes > max_wal_size && !force', and show a notice or error that the
>> same request can be done with the force option.
>>
>
> Hmm makes sense, thanks for the input. I'll make it so.
>

v5 attached.

It does [1] instead of silently creating segments.

Nothing gets created when it errors out, and the NOTICE is gone.

I ended up comparing after rounding up to whole segments rather than on the
byte value directly. Otherwise asking for exactly max_wal_size still sneaks
a
segment past it when max_wal_size isn't a multiple of the segment size.

The no-argument form still uses min_wal_size and skips the check, since
that is
what the server keeps anyway.

Regards,
Ayush

[1] ERROR:  WAL preallocation request exceeds "max_wal_size"
DETAIL:  The request needs 64 WAL segments, but "max_wal_size" allows 8.
HINT:  Call pg_wal_preallocate() with "force" set to true to bypass this
limit.

Attachment: v5-0001-pg_wal_preallocate.patch
Description: Binary data

Reply via email to