On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 2:07 PM, Thom Brown <t...@linux.com> wrote: > 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? > > 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
In that case, sholdn't the autotuning be changed to not limit it at 16MB? :) -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
