Re: [GENERAL] checkpoint_timout with no WAL activity

2016-11-07 Thread Michael Paquier
On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 9:32 PM, Tom DalPozzo wrote: > I'm using 9.5.3 . I had read about that bug but I didn't know that > wal_level=archive is equivalent to hot_standby from this point of view! I > guess it's equivalent in 9.5.3 too. No, this only applies to 9.6 and onward as a result of the int

Re: [GENERAL] checkpoint_timout with no WAL activity

2016-11-07 Thread Tom DalPozzo
I'm using 9.5.3 . I had read about that bug but I didn't know that wal_level=archive is equivalent to hot_standby from this point of view! I guess it's equivalent in 9.5.3 too. Regards Pupillo 2016-11-07 13:26 GMT+01:00 Michael Paquier : > On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 9:21 PM, Tom DalPozzo wrote: >

Re: [GENERAL] checkpoint_timout with no WAL activity

2016-11-07 Thread Michael Paquier
On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 9:21 PM, Tom DalPozzo wrote: > I know that, but with neither database activity or chekpoint, it doesn't > force anything. The fact is that there are checkpoints being executed every > checkpoint_timeout, and I don't understand why as if no WAL has been written > we should no

Re: [GENERAL] checkpoint_timout with no WAL activity

2016-11-07 Thread Michael Paquier
On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 9:14 PM, amul sul wrote: > On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Tom DalPozzo wrote: >> I have: >> checkpoint_timeout = 2min >> wal_level = archive >> archive_mode=on >> archive_timeout = 30 >> >> With NO dbase activity, I see the WAL being modified every 2min (and, >> consequent

Re: [GENERAL] checkpoint_timout with no WAL activity

2016-11-07 Thread Tom DalPozzo
I know that, but with neither database activity or chekpoint, it doesn't force anything. The fact is that there are checkpoints being executed every checkpoint_timeout, and I don't understand why as if no WAL has been written we should not care about passing the timeout. Regards Pupillo 2016-1

Re: [GENERAL] checkpoint_timout with no WAL activity

2016-11-07 Thread amul sul
On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Tom DalPozzo wrote: > Hi, > I have: > checkpoint_timeout = 2min > wal_level = archive > archive_mode=on > archive_timeout = 30 > > With NO dbase activity, I see the WAL being modified every 2min (and, > consequently, one WAL file archived every 2min too ). > > Is it

[GENERAL] checkpoint_timout with no WAL activity

2016-11-07 Thread Tom DalPozzo
Hi, I have: checkpoint_timeout = 2min wal_level = archive archive_mode=on archive_timeout = 30 With NO dbase activity, I see the WAL being modified every 2min (and, consequently, one WAL file archived every 2min too ). Is it right? I read: "If no WAL has been written since the previous checkpoint