| From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: auto-sizing wal_buffers |
| Date: | 2011-01-19 02:51:10 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTik10Yp08LqUiKBVpfhfWV-44vmj3h331U0FskOR@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 8:50 PM, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> Why is the minimum value 64kB only when wal_buffers is set to
>> -1? This seems confusing for users.
>>
>
> That's because the current default on older versions is 64kB. Since the
> automatic selection is going to be the new default, I hope, I don't want it
> to be possible it will pick a number smaller than the default of older
> versions. So the automatic lower limit is 64kB, while the actual manually
> set lower limit remains 32kB, as before.
It would be helpful to explain that as the source code comment. Also
in the document.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2011-01-19 03:52:16 | Re: pl/python refactoring |
| Previous Message | Hitoshi Harada | 2011-01-19 01:16:26 | Re: REVIEW: PL/Python validator function |