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

Re: Why Wal_buffer is 64KB

From: Jaime Casanova <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec>
To: Tadipathri Raghu <traghu(dot)dba(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Why Wal_buffer is 64KB
Date: 2010-03-25 17:15:58
Message-ID: 3073cc9b1003251015x590e962ata59dadbb58b42ce5@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Tadipathri Raghu <traghu(dot)dba(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Can anybody clarify on this, why wal_buffer is 64kb and what is advantages
> and disadvantages in increasing or decreasing the wal_buffer.
>

is 64kb just because by default we have low values in almost everything :)
and the advantages is that if your average transaction is more than
64kb large all wal data will be in memory until commit, actually i
thing it should be large enough to accomodate more than one
transaction but i'm not sure about that one... i usually use 1Mb for
OLTP systems

-- 
Atentamente,
Jaime Casanova
Soporte y capacitación de PostgreSQL
Asesoría y desarrollo de sistemas
Guayaquil - Ecuador
Cel. +59387171157

In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Pierre CDate: 2010-03-25 18:14:38
Subject: Re: Why Wal_buffer is 64KB
Previous:From: Brad NicholsonDate: 2010-03-25 16:05:47
Subject: Re: Why Wal_buffer is 64KB

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