On 17 January 2014 13:01, Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> wrote: > Is there any real use-case for not setting wal_buffers to -1 these days? > > Or should we just remove it and use the -1 behaviour at all times? > > IIRC we discussed not keeping it at all when the autotune behavior was > introduced, but said we wanted to keep it "just in case". If we're not ready > to remove it, then does that just mean that we need to fix it so we can?
Advertising
Robert Haas reported that setting it to 32MB can yield a considerable performance benefit: http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA+TgmobgMv_aaakLoasBt=5iYfi=kdcOUz0X9TdYe0c2SZ=2...@mail.gmail.com -- Thom -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
