On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 7:34 AM, Josh Berkus <j...@agliodbs.com> wrote: > I think we can be more specific on that last sentence; is there even any > *theoretical* benefit to settings above 16MB, the size of a WAL segment? > Certainly there have been no test results to show any.
If the workload generates 16MB or more WAL for wal_writer_delay, 16MB or more of wal_buffers would be effective. In that case, wal_buffers is likely to be filled up with unwritten WAL, then you have to write buffers while holding WALInsert lock. This is obviously not good. Regards, -- Fujii Masao NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
