Re: Raising the checkpoint_timeout limit

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>
To: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Raising the checkpoint_timeout limit
Date: 2016-02-04 12:30:47
Message-ID: CAM3SWZSFVSCnR_5-ord4yVpfGj+NDX0o-7Npomp_B+cJ7YWh1g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 8:16 PM, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> wrote:
>> I'm not sure what'd actually be a good upper limit. I'd be inclined to
>> even go to as high as a week or so. A lot of our settings have
>> upper/lower limits that aren't a good idea in general.
>
> In general, I favor having limits reflect fundamental system limitations
> rather than paternalism. Therefore, I would allow INT_MAX (68 years).

I agree. I'm in favor of having things be what is sometimes called
foolproof, but I think that you can only take that so far, and it's
mostly a matter of guiding a more or less reasonable user in the right
direction. Making it easy to do the right thing and hard to do the
wrong thing.

I don't think you can effectively design anything around a user that
makes perversely bad decision at every turn. If you investigate why a
user made a bad decision, there will usually be a chain of faulty but
not outrageous reasoning behind it.

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2016-02-04 12:37:26 Re: WIP: Detecting SSI conflicts before reporting constraint violations
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2016-02-04 12:24:21 Re: WAL logging problem in 9.4.3?