Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: WAL file utilization question

From: Keaton Adams <kadams(at)mxlogic(dot)com>
To: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: WAL file utilization question
Date: 2007-05-16 17:08:04
Message-ID: 1179335284.22514.30.camel@MXLRMT-208.corp.mxlogic.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin
That's considerably more transaction log space to allocate than what I
am used to (up to 16 GB), but I'll set the parameter and see just how
many logs PostgreSQL creates and what the new rate of WAL file archiving
is over my test period.

Thanks, this information was very helpful,

Keaton



On Wed, 2007-05-16 at 11:51 -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote:

> On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 10:49:04AM -0600, Keaton Adams wrote:
> > So, if I do set the checkpoint_segments parameter to 50, 75, or even 100
> > I will have a considerable number of WAL files in data/pg_xlog, but they
> > will be used more efficiently, so I will be archiving less?  That's what
> > I understand from the comments received so far.
> 
> Yes. Let it create 500 or 1000 WAL files if it wants... it's much more
> important to limit the frequency of checkpoints than to reduce the
> number of WAL files (which has virtually no impact on performance).

In response to

pgsql-admin by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2007-05-16 17:50:04
Subject: Re: ERROR: invalid memory alloc request size
Previous:From: Jim C. NasbyDate: 2007-05-16 16:51:43
Subject: Re: WAL file utilization question

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group