| From: | Luca Ferrari <fluca1978(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jason Ralph <jralph(at)affinitysolutions(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PG11.2 - wal_level =minimal max_wal_senders = 0 |
| Date: | 2019-09-04 16:16:00 |
| Message-ID: | CAKoxK+6=aEQ=9j7i9vQRYU-mUn3uiLB+_AgN1tGR0skE6mN46w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 5:15 PM Jason Ralph <jralph(at)affinitysolutions(dot)com> wrote:
> The question I have is, for a production database not doing replication, can I safely set the following parameters, I understand that minimal will also disable wal_archiving so I am concerned about that as well.
>
> wal_level = minimal
>
> max_wal_senders = 0
>
>
>
> I have been looking at the documentation and I guess I am looking for a yes this is ok, I figured it’s on by default for a reason so I was hesitant to change it.
I don't see why you should not set them as you described.
The idea is that the overhead of having replica over minimal is today
enough "low" in contrast to the need for replication (e.g., backup
tools like pgbackrest).
Luca
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jason Ralph | 2019-09-04 20:44:31 | RE: PG11.2 - wal_level =minimal max_wal_senders = 0 |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-09-04 15:17:18 | Re: Running a Simple Update Statement Fails, Second Time Suceeds. |