| From: | amul sul <sulamul(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom DalPozzo <t(dot)dalpozzo(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: checkpoint_timout with no WAL activity |
| Date: | 2016-11-07 12:14:22 |
| Message-ID: | CAAJ_b94+BX5YYPVzGy5DG_nLXBHFtQutbb6enM+sjeqOYoCbqg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Tom DalPozzo <t(dot)dalpozzo(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Hi,
> I have:
> checkpoint_timeout = 2min
> wal_level = archive
> archive_mode=on
> archive_timeout = 30
>
> With NO dbase activity, I see the WAL being modified every 2min (and,
> consequently, one WAL file archived every 2min too ).
>
> Is it right? I read: "If no WAL has been written since the previous
> checkpoint, new checkpoints will be skipped even if checkpoint_timeout has
> passed."
I guess archive_timeout forcing to switch new WAL file, see this :
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/runtime-config-wal.html#GUC-ARCHIVE-TIMEOUT
Regards,
Amul
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom DalPozzo | 2016-11-07 12:21:44 | Re: checkpoint_timout with no WAL activity |
| Previous Message | Albe Laurenz | 2016-11-07 11:00:34 | Re: What is the best thing to do with PUBLIC schema in Postgresql database |