Josh Berkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Oh, and wal_buffers, the default for which we should just change if it > weren't for SHMMAX.
Uh, why? On a workload of mostly small transactions, what value is
there in lots of wal_buffers?
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
