On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 4:09 PM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote:
> On 2016-09-20 16:05:44 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 2:49 PM, Peter Eisentraut
>> <peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> > On 8/24/16 9:31 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> >> I'd like to propose that we increase the default WAL segment size,
>> >> which is currently 16MB.
>> >
>> > While the discussion about the best default value is ongoing, maybe we
>> > should at least *allow* some larger sizes, for testing out.  Currently,
>> > configure says "Allowed values are 1,2,4,8,16,32,64.".  What might be a
>> > good new upper limit?
>
> I'm doubtful it's worth increasing this.
>
>> 1GB?
>
> That sounds way too big to me. WAL file allocation would trigger pretty
> massive IO storms during zeroing, max_wal_size is going to be hard to
> tune, the amounts of dirty data during bulk loads is going to be very
> hard to control.  If somebody wants to do something like this they
> better be well informed enough to override a #define.

EnterpriseDB has customers generating multiple TB of WAL per day.
Even with a 1GB segment size, some of them will fill multiple files
per minute.  At the current limit of 64MB, a few of them would still
fill more than one file per second.  That is not sane.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Reply via email to