| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Venkata Balaji N <nag1010(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Redesigning checkpoint_segments |
| Date: | 2015-02-05 14:47:18 |
| Message-ID: | 20150205144718.GF9201@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2015-02-05 09:42:37 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> I previously proposed 100 segments, or 1.6GB. If that seems too
> large, how about 64 segments, or 1.024GB? I think there will be few
> people who can't tolerate a gigabyte of xlog under peak load, and an
> awful lot who will benefit from it.
It'd be quite easier to go there if we'd shrink back to the min_size
after a while, after having peaked above it. IIUC the patch doesn't do
that?
Admittedly it's not easy to come up with an algorithm that doesn't cause
superflous file removals. Initiating wal files isn't cheap.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2015-02-05 14:53:24 | Re: Redesigning checkpoint_segments |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2015-02-05 14:45:50 | Simplify sleeping while reading/writing from client |