On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 01:13:20AM +0100, Andres Freund wrote: > is there any reason for the rather arbitrary and low checkpoint_timeout > limit?
Not that I know, and it is inconvenient. > I'm not sure what'd actually be a good upper limit. I'd be inclined to > even go to as high as a week or so. A lot of our settings have > upper/lower limits that aren't a good idea in general. In general, I favor having limits reflect fundamental system limitations rather than paternalism. Therefore, I would allow INT_MAX (68 years). > I'm also wondering if it'd not make sense to raise the default timeout > to 15min or so. The upper ceiling for that really is recovery time, and > that has really shrunk rather drastically due to faster cpus and > architectural improvements in postgres (bgwriter, separate > checkpointer/bgwriter, restartpoints, ...). Have those recovery improvements outpaced the increases in max recovery time from higher core counts generating more WAL per minute? nm -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
