Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> writes: > On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 4:52 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> It would be easier to sell this if we had some numbers for the amount of >> overhead it would add for people *not* using the features. I do not think >> I've ever seen, eg, pgbench results with different wal_level and all else >> the same.
> That's going to be extremely workload dependent. For example, I'd expect > the overhead to be very close to 0 on a pgbench SELECT only benchmark :) > The big thing is, IIRC, that we turn off the optimizations in > min_wal_level. *most* people will see no impact of their regular > application runtime from that, but it might definitely have an effect on > data loads and such. For normal runtime, there should be very close to zero > difference, no? I was asking for a demonstration of that, not just handwaving. Even if it was measured years ago, I wouldn't assume the comparison would be the same on current Postgres. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers