On 07/30/17 14:55, Phil Stracchino wrote: > On 07/30/17 05:19, Kern Sibbald wrote: >> I had always thought the limit was 25,000, so was surprised >> when I saw 500,000 I was a bit surprised. I suppose it is a sort of >> insane limit I added. Whether it works or not, I don't know. A bit >> I found out why I remembered 25,000. That is because it is the >> maximum set for PostgreSQL. > > 25000 would be a much more reasonable size.
Oops ... I didn't finish that thought. What I'd meant to say was: 25000 would be a much more reasonable size, and certainly should *work* fine with or without Galera in use (even though it's larger than ideal according to Galera best-performance guidelines). However, what my testing exposed was that unless there are actually other places that limit needs to be set, then what it's set to is moot because the batch size limit doesn't actually work anyway. -- Phil Stracchino Babylon Communications ph...@caerllewys.net p...@co.ordinate.org Landline: +1.603.293.8485 Mobile: +1.603.998.6958 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Bacula-devel mailing list Bacula-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-devel
