From: Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>
To: josh@agliodbs.com
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: wal_buffer tests in
Date: 28 Jul 2005 07:49:29 -0400
Message-ID: <87oe8n881i.fsf@stark.xeocode.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200507271330.02083.josh@agliodbs.com>
References: <200507271330.02083.josh@agliodbs.com>
Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
> Folks,
>
> I ran a wal_buffer test series. It appears that increasing the
> wal_buffers is indeed very important for OLTP applications, potentially
> resulting in as much as a 15% average increase in transaction processing.
> What's interesting is that this is not just true for 8.1, it's true for
> 8.0.3 as well.
You have wal_buffer set to 2048? That's pretty radical compared to the default
of just 5. Your tests shows you had to go to this large a value to see the
maximum effect?
--
greg
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: gsstark@mit.edu, josh@agliodbs.com, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: wal_buffer tests in
In-Reply-To: <87oe8n881i.fsf@stark.xeocode.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox