"Josh Berkus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Greg, > >> At least that way we could always steal more if we want or return some, as >> long as we're careful about when we do it. That would open the door to having >> these parameters be dynamically adjustable. That alone would be worthwhile >> even if we bypass all bells and whistles of the buffer manager. >> > > One hitch, though, is that asynchronous commit could consume big chunks of > shared_buffers. So we might still need a limit for people who are using > async.
Well currently we use a fixed number of fixed-sized buffers, no? I doubt we'll change that even if we take this tact of making wal_buffers resizable by stealing buffers from the buffer manager for precisely the reasons Tom was describing. -- Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com Ask me about EnterpriseDB's RemoteDBA services! -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
