> I don't think this is based on a useful test for wal_buffers.  The
> wal_buffers setting only has to be large enough for the maximum amount
> of WAL log data that your system emits between commits, because a commit
> (from anyone) is going to flush the WAL data to disk (for everyone).
> So a benchmark based on short transactions is just not going to show
> any benefit to increasing the setting.

Here's a question then - what is the _drawback_ to having 1024 wal_buffers
as opposed to 8?


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?


Reply via email to