| From: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | Luca Ferrari <fluca1978(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: when is useful min_wal_size? |
| Date: | 2021-02-04 11:56:04 |
| Message-ID: | b2f73ce7c52ee6ceb63073823c22d0803fc6c0b4.camel@cybertec.at |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Thu, 2021-02-04 at 12:41 +0100, Luca Ferrari wrote:
> this may sound trivial, but in my opinion min_wal_size is useful only
> when the cluster is initialized or the wals are reset.
> Am I wrong?
The amount of WAL that PostgreSQL pre-creates for future use
depends on the database activity but has a lower limit of "min_wal_size".
If your workload is subject to long lulls followed by activity spikes,
raising "min_wal_size" can improve the performance at the beginning
of an activity spike.
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
--
Cybertec | https://www.cybertec-postgresql.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joao Miguel Ferreira | 2021-02-04 14:20:10 | cant connect to localhost:5432 (but unix socket ok) |
| Previous Message | Laurenz Albe | 2021-02-04 11:42:38 | Re: curious vacuum full behavior |