| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Venkata Balaji N <nag1010(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Redesigning checkpoint_segments |
| Date: | 2015-03-02 23:16:25 |
| Message-ID: | 54F4EF49.1010002@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 03/02/2015 12:23 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 03/02/2015 08:05 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
>> That was the impression I had too, which was why I was surprised. The
>> last post on the topic was one by Robert Haas, agreeing with me on a
>> value of 1GB, and there were zero objections after that.
>
> I didn't make any further posts to that thread because I had already
> objected earlier and didn't have anything to add.
>
> Now, if someone's going to go and raise the default, I'm not going to
> make a fuss about it, but the fact remains that *all* the defaults in
> postgresql.conf.sample are geared towards small systems, and not hogging
> all resources. The default max_wal_size of 128 MB is well in line with
> e.g. shared_buffers=128MB.
OK, I don't think Robert or I realized that you were still not agreeing.
I originally thought we should keep it small, but Robert pointed out
that under your code, WAL only grows if you have high traffic.
Patch attached in a new thread.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2015-03-02 23:18:16 | Patch: raise default for max_wal_segments to 1GB |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2015-03-02 23:07:51 | Re: Why are json <=> jsonb casts marked as explicit-only? |