| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Defaults for replication/backup |
| Date: | 2016-02-13 15:52:35 |
| Message-ID: | 22066.1455378755@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
> Yes, these changes will increase some of the default overhead. My argument
> against that is that anybody who actually cares about that overhead is
> going to be tuning their database *anyway*, so they can just change things
> back to the old defaults.
> So, I suggest the following changes to the defaults:
> wal_level=hot_standby
> max_wal_senders=10
> max_replication_slots=10
It would be easier to sell this if we had some numbers for the amount of
overhead it would add for people *not* using the features. I do not think
I've ever seen, eg, pgbench results with different wal_level and all else
the same.
> And in pg_hba.conf, we enable the replication connections by default for
> the superuser on local/localhost.
Potential security implications?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2016-02-13 16:01:35 | Re: Defaults for replication/backup |
| Previous Message | Christian Ullrich | 2016-02-13 15:45:33 | Re: Crash with old Windows on new CPU |