Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes: > There's an alternative approach we could take, which is to write in 4KB > increments, while keeping 8KB pages. With the current format that's not > obviously a bad idea. But given there aren't really advantages in 8KB WAL > pages, it seems we should just go for 4KB?
Seems like that's doubling the overhead of WAL page headers. Do we need
to try to skinny those down?
regards, tom lane
