| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | wal_segment size vs max_wal_size |
| Date: | 2016-09-21 15:03:45 |
| Message-ID: | 89a9e724-9fc1-ce01-4997-e7a3f0f16063@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
There is apparently some misbehavior if max_wal_size is less than 5 *
wal_segment_size.
For example, if you build with --with-wal-segsize=64, then the recovery
test fails unless you set max_wal_size to at least 320MB in
PostgresNode.pm. The issue is that pg_basebackup fails with:
pg_basebackup: could not get transaction log end position from server:
ERROR: could not find any WAL files
This should probably be made friendlier in some way. But it also shows
that bigger WAL segment sizes are apparently not well-chartered
territory lately.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2016-09-21 15:20:10 | Re: [PATCH] get_home_path: use HOME |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2016-09-21 14:50:13 | Re: increasing the default WAL segment size |