> "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 ...
What I mean is say you have an enterprise server doing heaps of transactions
with lots of work. If you have scads of RAM, could you just shove up
wal_buffers really high and assume it will improve performance?
Chris
