Re: Invalid WAL segment size. Allowed values are 1,2,4,8,16,32,64

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Cocco Gianfranco <Gianfranco(dot)Cocco(at)eng(dot)it>
Cc: "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org>, DBA <DBA(at)italiaonline(dot)it>
Subject: Re: Invalid WAL segment size. Allowed values are 1,2,4,8,16,32,64
Date: 2017-06-09 22:43:00
Message-ID: CAB7nPqT=+g4RWeqhW1=OsxGAXofbwekfMsznUd8Ug-GSB+gxVQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs pgsql-performance

On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 10:55 PM, Cocco Gianfranco
<Gianfranco(dot)Cocco(at)eng(dot)it> wrote:
> Is there a way to fix “wal_segsize” to about 1 Gb in 9.2. version, and “rebuild” postgreSQL server?

As long as you are able to compile your own version of Postgres and
your distribution does not allow that, there is nothing preventing you
to do so.

> The goal is to drastically reduce the number of WALs.
> Upgrading to 9.5, is the only way to fix this issue?

Note that a server initialized with a segment size of X won't work
with a binary compiled with a size of Y. But you can always take a
logical dump of the server before the upgrade, and reload it in the
version of the server with a larger segment size. The cost here is
more downtime.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Noah Misch 2017-06-10 06:31:53 Re: BUG #14680: startup process on standby encounter a deadlock of TwoPhaseStateLock when redo 2PC xlog
Previous Message Joe Conway 2017-06-09 21:52:17 Re: [BUGS] BUG #14682: row level security not work with partitioned table

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message phb07 2017-06-10 07:04:51 Re: Rollback table data.
Previous Message Vladimir Sitnikov 2017-06-09 22:08:34 Re: Improving PostgreSQL insert performance