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

Re: WAL FILES

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: ohp(at)pyrenet(dot)fr
Cc: pgsql-hackers list <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: WAL FILES
Date: 2002-05-27 21:17:58
Message-ID: 200205272117.g4RLHw419198@candle.pha.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Olivier PRENANT wrote:
> Hi every one.
> 
> I just moved (at last!) to 7.2.1. Works like a charm...
> I'm suprised though by the number of WAL files.
> 
> I have 8 files where postgresql.conf says WAL_FILES=4.
> 
> What did I miss ? (I have no outstanding transaction)
> 
> FWIW, t's on UW711.

No, you are fine.  The current GUC params are confusing. I did update
the documentation for 7.3, but I plan to reorganize those params to be
more meaningful.

Actually, I have in TODO:

  Remove wal_files postgresql.conf option because WAL files are now
  recycled 

because the param no longer controls what you think it controls.  In 7.1
WAL files where not recycled, so WAL_FILES was used to pre-allocate
files so there wasn't as much happening during checkpoint.  Now, with
recycling, there is no need.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us               |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

  • WAL FILES at 2002-05-26 16:55:21 from Olivier PRENANT

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2002-05-27 21:18:42
Subject: Re: is there any backend timeout undocumented?
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2002-05-27 21:12:33
Subject: Re: Replication status

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