Horton

Thread

Commits

  1. Fix some mentions to memory units in postgresql.conf.sample

  1. max_slot_wal_keep_size comment in postgresql.conf

    Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com> — 2020-05-26T13:10:40Z

    In postgresql.conf, it says:

#max_slot_wal_keep_size = -1  # measured in bytes; -1 disables

I don't know if that is describing the dimension of this parameter or the
units of it, but the default units for it are megabytes, not individual
bytes, so I think it is pretty confusing.

Cheers,

Jeff

  2. Re: max_slot_wal_keep_size comment in postgresql.conf

    Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> — 2020-05-27T01:46:27Z

    At Tue, 26 May 2020 09:10:40 -0400, Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com> wrote in 
> In postgresql.conf, it says:
> 
> #max_slot_wal_keep_size = -1  # measured in bytes; -1 disables
> 
> I don't know if that is describing the dimension of this parameter or the
> units of it, but the default units for it are megabytes, not individual
> bytes, so I think it is pretty confusing.

Agreed. It should be a leftover at the time the unit was changed
(before committed) to MB from bytes.  The default value makes the
confusion worse.

Is the following works?

#max_slot_wal_keep_size = -1  # in MB; -1 disables

regards.

-- 
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center

  3. Re: max_slot_wal_keep_size comment in postgresql.conf

    Isaac Morland <isaac.morland@gmail.com> — 2020-05-27T02:56:39Z

    On Tue, 26 May 2020 at 21:46, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
wrote:

> At Tue, 26 May 2020 09:10:40 -0400, Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>
> wrote in
> > In postgresql.conf, it says:
> >
> > #max_slot_wal_keep_size = -1  # measured in bytes; -1 disables
> >
> > I don't know if that is describing the dimension of this parameter or the
> > units of it, but the default units for it are megabytes, not individual
> > bytes, so I think it is pretty confusing.
>
> Agreed. It should be a leftover at the time the unit was changed
> (before committed) to MB from bytes.  The default value makes the
> confusion worse.
>
> Is the following works?
>
> #max_slot_wal_keep_size = -1  # in MB; -1 disables


Extreme pedant question: Is it MB (10^6 bytes) or MiB (2^20 bytes)?

  4. Re: max_slot_wal_keep_size comment in postgresql.conf

    Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> — 2020-05-27T06:11:00Z

    On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 10:46:27AM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> Agreed. It should be a leftover at the time the unit was changed
> (before committed) to MB from bytes.  The default value makes the
> confusion worse.
> 
> Is the following works?
> 
> #max_slot_wal_keep_size = -1  # in MB; -1 disables

Indeed, better to fix that.  The few GUCs using memory units that have
such a mention in their comments use the actual name of the memory
unit, and not its abbreviation (see log_temp_files).  So it seems more
logic to me to just use "in megabytes; -1 disables", that would be
also more consistent with the time-unit-based ones.
--
Michael

  5. Re: max_slot_wal_keep_size comment in postgresql.conf

    Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> — 2020-05-27T06:48:37Z

    At Tue, 26 May 2020 22:56:39 -0400, Isaac Morland <isaac.morland@gmail.com> wrote in 
> On Tue, 26 May 2020 at 21:46, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > At Tue, 26 May 2020 09:10:40 -0400, Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>
> > wrote in
> > > In postgresql.conf, it says:
> > >
> > > #max_slot_wal_keep_size = -1  # measured in bytes; -1 disables
> > >
> > > I don't know if that is describing the dimension of this parameter or the
> > > units of it, but the default units for it are megabytes, not individual
> > > bytes, so I think it is pretty confusing.
> >
> > Agreed. It should be a leftover at the time the unit was changed
> > (before committed) to MB from bytes.  The default value makes the
> > confusion worse.
> >
> > Is the following works?
> >
> > #max_slot_wal_keep_size = -1  # in MB; -1 disables
> 
> 
> Extreme pedant question: Is it MB (10^6 bytes) or MiB (2^20 bytes)?


GUC variables for file/memory sizes are in a traditional
representation, that is, a power of two represented by
SI-prefixes. AFAICS PostgreSQL doesn't use binary-prefixed units.

regards.

-- 
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center

  6. Re: max_slot_wal_keep_size comment in postgresql.conf

    Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com> — 2020-05-27T07:00:09Z

    
On 2020/05/27 15:11, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 10:46:27AM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
>> Agreed. It should be a leftover at the time the unit was changed
>> (before committed) to MB from bytes.  The default value makes the
>> confusion worse.
>>
>> Is the following works?
>>
>> #max_slot_wal_keep_size = -1  # in MB; -1 disables
> 
> Indeed, better to fix that.  The few GUCs using memory units that have
> such a mention in their comments use the actual name of the memory
> unit, and not its abbreviation (see log_temp_files).  So it seems more
> logic to me to just use "in megabytes; -1 disables", that would be
> also more consistent with the time-unit-based ones.

+1

#temp_file_limit = -1			# limits per-process temp file space
					# in kB, or -1 for no limit

BTW, the abbreviation "in kB" is used in temp_file_limit.

Regards,

-- 
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION

  7. Re: max_slot_wal_keep_size comment in postgresql.conf

    Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> — 2020-05-27T07:21:59Z

    At Wed, 27 May 2020 15:11:00 +0900, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote in 
> On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 10:46:27AM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> > Agreed. It should be a leftover at the time the unit was changed
> > (before committed) to MB from bytes.  The default value makes the
> > confusion worse.
> > 
> > Is the following works?
> > 
> > #max_slot_wal_keep_size = -1  # in MB; -1 disables
> 
> Indeed, better to fix that.  The few GUCs using memory units that have
> such a mention in their comments use the actual name of the memory
> unit, and not its abbreviation (see log_temp_files).  So it seems more

I was not sure which is preferable.  Does that mean we will fix the
following, too?

> #temp_file_limit = -1           # limits per-process temp file space
>                     # in kB, or -1 for no limit

> logic to me to just use "in megabytes; -1 disables", that would be
> also more consistent with the time-unit-based ones.

I don't oppose to full-spelling.  How about the attached?

regards.

-- 
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center

  8. Re: max_slot_wal_keep_size comment in postgresql.conf

    Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> — 2020-05-27T07:35:51Z

    On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 04:21:59PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> I don't oppose to full-spelling.  How about the attached?

No problem from me.
--
Michael

  9. Re: max_slot_wal_keep_size comment in postgresql.conf

    Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> — 2020-05-28T06:44:26Z

    On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 04:35:51PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 04:21:59PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> > I don't oppose to full-spelling.  How about the attached?
> 
> No problem from me.

And applied this one as of 55ca50d.
--
Michael

  10. Re: max_slot_wal_keep_size comment in postgresql.conf

    Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> — 2020-05-28T08:09:25Z

    At Thu, 28 May 2020 15:44:26 +0900, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote in 
> On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 04:35:51PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 04:21:59PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> > > I don't oppose to full-spelling.  How about the attached?
> > 
> > No problem from me.
> 
> And applied this one as of 55ca50d.

Thanks!

-- 
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center