Re: segment size depending *_wal_size defaults (was increasing the default WAL segment size)

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Beena Emerson <memissemerson(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: segment size depending *_wal_size defaults (was increasing the default WAL segment size)
Date: 2017-08-30 00:49:14
Message-ID: CAB7nPqTE4n8v3z1PdWirSj9F4t-opTexjtqv1HRJC38Tug=C1w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 9:36 AM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> So the question is whether we want {max,min}_wal_size be sized in
> multiples of segment sizes or as a proper byte size. I'm leaning
> towards the latter.

Logically in the code it is just a matter of adjusting multipliers. Do
you think that we should worry about wal segment sizes higher than
2GB? Support for int64 GUCs is not here yet.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2017-08-30 01:00:59 Re: A design for amcheck heapam verification
Previous Message Andres Freund 2017-08-30 00:36:10 segment size depending *_wal_size defaults (was increasing the default WAL segment size)