From: | Clemens Eisserer <linuxhippy(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Why is wal_writer_delay limited to 10s? |
Date: | 2013-12-27 13:01:01 |
Message-ID: | CAFvQSYQaWaGLq63x7=Lcc1qxEEfeG8jsRC=4jbLOdnsbGW6egg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Hi,
Just to be curious, why is wal_writer_delay limited to 10s?
I am using postgresql in an embedded environment where every 10s
sensor values are logged and even with "synchronous_commit = off" and
wal_writer_delay=10000 this burns quite a lot of nand cycles. For me
it wouldn't hurt loosing minutes of data - it is only important that
the database is in a consistent state after power loss.
Thanks, Clemens
PS: It is really impressive how flexible and powerful postgresql is.
I am using it on small TP-Link OpenWRT router (32m ram, 400mhz MIPS),
on a raspberry pi as well as on larger servers for "real" database
stuff with huge Hibernate-generated queries. Whenever/weherever I use
postgresql, it does an excellent job and is rock-solid.
Thanks a lot for this impressive piece of work :)
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joseph Kregloh | 2013-12-27 14:50:44 | Re: pg_upgrade & tablespaces |
Previous Message | Tim Kane | 2013-12-27 12:30:24 | ON_ERROR_EXIT and interactive mode (or, how to force interactive mode off) |