On Mon, 11 Apr 2022, 15:55 Robert Haas, wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 8, 2022 at 11:10 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 8, 2022 at 10:45 AM Thom Brown wrote:
> > > Thanks. This doesn't include my self-correction:
> > >
> > > s/kept on standby/kept on the standby/
> >
> > Here is v2, endeavoring to
On Fri, Apr 8, 2022 at 11:10 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 8, 2022 at 10:45 AM Thom Brown wrote:
> > Thanks. This doesn't include my self-correction:
> >
> > s/kept on standby/kept on the standby/
>
> Here is v2, endeavoring to rectify that oversight.
Committed.
--
Robert Haas
EDB:
On Fri, Apr 8, 2022 at 10:45 AM Thom Brown wrote:
> Thanks. This doesn't include my self-correction:
>
> s/kept on standby/kept on the standby/
Here is v2, endeavoring to rectify that oversight.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Fri, 8 Apr 2022, 14:36 Robert Haas, wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2022 at 8:15 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 8:43 PM Thom Brown wrote:
> > > I share your discomfort with the wording. How about:
> > >
> > > WAL records must be kept on standby until they are ready to be applied.
On Fri, Apr 8, 2022 at 3:36 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2022 at 8:15 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 8:43 PM Thom Brown wrote:
> > > I share your discomfort with the wording. How about:
> > >
> > > WAL records must be kept on standby until they are ready to be
On Wed, Apr 6, 2022 at 8:15 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 8:43 PM Thom Brown wrote:
> > I share your discomfort with the wording. How about:
> >
> > WAL records must be kept on standby until they are ready to be applied.
> > Therefore, longer delays will result in a greater
On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 8:43 PM Thom Brown wrote:
> I share your discomfort with the wording. How about:
>
> WAL records must be kept on standby until they are ready to be applied.
> Therefore, longer delays will result in a greater accumulation of WAL files,
> increasing disk space requirements
On Wed, 6 Apr 2022 at 01:42, Thom Brown wrote:
>
> On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 at 16:02, Robert Haas wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 10:58 AM Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > >> Makes sense. I will do this soon if nobody objects.
> > >>
> > >> I'm mildly uncomfortable with the phrase "WAL records
On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 at 16:02, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 10:58 AM Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >> Makes sense. I will do this soon if nobody objects.
> >>
> >> I'm mildly uncomfortable with the phrase "WAL records generated over
> >> the delay period" because it seems a bit
On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 10:58 AM Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> Makes sense. I will do this soon if nobody objects.
>>
>> I'm mildly uncomfortable with the phrase "WAL records generated over
>> the delay period" because it seems a bit imprecise, but I'm not sure
>> what would be better and I think the
On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 4:54 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 8:41 AM Thom Brown wrote:
> > I know it's been 8 years, but I still think it would be a useful note
> > to add to the docs.
>
Many points for bringing that one back :)
Makes sense. I will do this soon if nobody
On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 8:41 AM Thom Brown wrote:
> I know it's been 8 years, but I still think it would be a useful note
> to add to the docs.
Makes sense. I will do this soon if nobody objects.
I'm mildly uncomfortable with the phrase "WAL records generated over
the delay period" because it
12 matches
Mail list logo
