From: Masahiro Ikeda <ikeda...@oss.nttdata.com> > It's important to provide the metrics for tuning the size of WAL buffers. > For now, it's lack of the statistics how often processes wait to write WAL > because WAL buffer is full. > > If those situation are often occurred, WAL buffer is too small for the > workload. > DBAs must to tune the WAL buffer size for performance improvement.
Yes, it's helpful to know if we need to enlarge the WAL buffer. That's why our colleague HariBabu proposed the patch. We'd be happy if it could be committed in some form. > There are related threads, but those are not merged. > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/4ff824f3.5090...@uptime.jp > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAJrrPGc6APFUGYNcPe4qcNx > pL8gXKYv1KST%2BvwJcFtCSCEySnA%40mail.gmail.com What's the difference between those patches? What blocked them from being committed? Regards Takayuki Tsunakawa
