Re: pg_start_backup and pg_stop_backup Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make CheckRequiredParameterValues() depend upon correct

Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>

From: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2010-05-09T10:33:56Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Sat, 2010-05-08 at 23:55 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 10:40 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> >> Uh, did we decide that 'wal_keep_segments' was the best name for this
> >> GUC setting?  I know we shipped beta1 using that name.
> >
> > I thought min_wal_segments was a reasonable proposal, but it wasn't
> > clear if there was consensus or not.
> 
> I think most people thought it was another reasonable choice, but I
> think the consensus position is probably something like "it's about
> the same" rather than "it's definitely better".  We had one or two
> people with stronger opinions than that on either side, I believe.

It's only a name and not worth a long discussion on.

-- 
 Simon Riggs           www.2ndQuadrant.com