| From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Beena Emerson <memissemerson(at)gmail(dot)com>, tushar <tushar(dot)ahuja(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Prabhat Sahu <prabhat(dot)sahu(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Kuntal Ghosh <kuntalghosh(dot)2007(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: increasing the default WAL segment size |
| Date: | 2017-03-25 16:30:11 |
| Message-ID: | 20170325163011.GZ9812@tamriel.snowman.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Peter,
* Peter Eisentraut (peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com) wrote:
> On 3/24/17 19:13, David Steele wrote:
> > Behavior for the current default of 16MB is unchanged, and all other
> > sizes go through a logical progression.
>
> Just at a glance, without analyzing the math behind it, this scheme
> seems super confusing.
Compared to:
1GB:
000000010000000000000001
000000010000000000000002
000000010000000000000003
000000010000000100000000
...?
Having the naming no longer match the LSN and also, seemingly, jump
randomly, strikes me as very confusing. At least with the LSN-based
approach, we aren't jumping randomly but exactly in-line with what the
starting LSN of the file is, and always by the same amount (in hex).
Thanks!
Stephen
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Page | 2017-03-25 16:30:24 | Re: Monitoring roles patch |
| Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2017-03-25 16:24:09 | Re: pgsql: Add COMMENT and SECURITY LABEL support for publications and subs |