Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Josh Berkus <josh@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On 11/16/10 12:39 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
>> I want to next go through and replicate some of the actual database
>> level tests before giving a full opinion on whether this data proves
>> it's worth changing the wal_sync_method detection.  So far I'm torn
>> between whether that's the right approach, or if we should just increase
>> the default value for wal_buffers to something more reasonable.

> We'd love to, but wal_buffers uses sysV shmem.

Well, we're not going to increase the default to gigabytes, but we could
very probably increase it by a factor of 10 or so without anyone
squawking.  It's been awhile since I heard of anyone trying to run PG in
4MB shmmax.  How much would a change of that size help?

			regards, tom lane

-- 
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance


[Postgresql General]     [Postgresql PHP]     [PHP Users]     [PHP Home]     [PHP on Windows]     [Kernel Newbies]     [PHP Classes]     [PHP Books]     [PHP Databases]     [Yosemite]

  Powered by Linux