From: | Keaton Adams <kadams(at)mxlogic(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org> |
Cc: | pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: WAL file utilization question |
Date: | 2007-05-16 17:08:04 |
Message-ID: | 1179335284.22514.30.camel@MXLRMT-208.corp.mxlogic.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
That's considerably more transaction log space to allocate than what I
am used to (up to 16 GB), but I'll set the parameter and see just how
many logs PostgreSQL creates and what the new rate of WAL file archiving
is over my test period.
Thanks, this information was very helpful,
Keaton
On Wed, 2007-05-16 at 11:51 -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 10:49:04AM -0600, Keaton Adams wrote:
> > So, if I do set the checkpoint_segments parameter to 50, 75, or even 100
> > I will have a considerable number of WAL files in data/pg_xlog, but they
> > will be used more efficiently, so I will be archiving less? That's what
> > I understand from the comments received so far.
>
> Yes. Let it create 500 or 1000 WAL files if it wants... it's much more
> important to limit the frequency of checkpoints than to reduce the
> number of WAL files (which has virtually no impact on performance).
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-05-16 17:50:04 | Re: ERROR: invalid memory alloc request size |
Previous Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2007-05-16 16:51:43 | Re: WAL file utilization question |