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
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
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

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

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