Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: [HACKERS] More benchmarking of wal_buffers - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [HACKERS] More benchmarking of wal_buffers
Date
Msg-id 3579.1045192235@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] More benchmarking of wal_buffers  ("Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] More benchmarking of wal_buffers
List pgsql-performance
Tree view 
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au> writes:
> Here's a question then - what is the _drawback_ to having 1024 wal_buffers
> as opposed to 8?

Waste of RAM?  You'd be better off leaving that 8 meg available for use
as general-purpose buffers ...

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: "Christopher Kings-Lynne"
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] More benchmarking of wal_buffers
Next
From: "Christopher Kings-Lynne"
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] More benchmarking of wal_buffers