Re: Purpose of wal_init_zero

From: Hannu Krosing <hannuk(at)google(dot)com>
To: Ritu Bhandari <mailritubhandari(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Andy Fan <zhihuifan1213(at)163(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Purpose of wal_init_zero
Date: 2025-01-16 22:29:05
Message-ID: CAMT0RQSb1_hmTiYtCzOEe6sFSeAh7vW=UUwyahPQ_gyZmEvjBw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 10:21 AM Ritu Bhandari
<mailritubhandari(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> Could we consider adding back fallocate?

Or if not adding it back for all then maybe have a 3-value wal_init_zero :

wal_init_zero = on;
wal_init_zero = off;
wal_init_zero = fallocate;

?

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David G. Johnston 2025-01-16 22:41:06 Re: Document NULL
Previous Message Peter Smith 2025-01-16 22:09:27 Re: Log a warning in pg_createsubscriber for max_slot_wal_keep_size