On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 3:11 AM, Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> wrote:
> On 10/17/15 10:25 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > I think that we should just suggest a reverse formula of the maximum
> > soft limit of checkpoint_segments for max_wal_size in the release notes
> > of 9.5, basically:
> > (3 * your_old_checkpoint_segments + 1) * 16MB = max_wal_size
> How about this patch?
> (Actually, I'd remove the + 1 to make the numbers come out rounder.)
Removing the + 1 is fine for me.
+ been removed. Its place it taken by the new
"Its place is taken".
Other than those little things this looks fine to me.