Re: PG12: Any drawback of increasing wal_keep_segments

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
Искать
От
Stephen Frost
Тема
Re: PG12: Any drawback of increasing wal_keep_segments
Дата
Msg-id
20220329151729.GN10577@tamriel.snowman.net
Ответ на
Список
Дерево обсуждения
PG12: Any drawback of increasing wal_keep_segments "Shukla, Pranjal" <pshukla@akamai.com>
Re: PG12: Any drawback of increasing wal_keep_segments Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Re: PG12: Any drawback of increasing wal_keep_segments Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
Re: PG12: Any drawback of increasing wal_keep_segments Marc <postgres@arcict.com>
Re: PG12: Any drawback of increasing wal_keep_segments Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
Greetings,

* Alvaro Herrera (alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org) wrote:
> On 2022-Mar-22, Shukla, Pranjal wrote:
> > Are there any disadvantages of increasing the “wal_keep_segments” to a
> > higher number say, 500? Will it have any impact on performance of
> > streaming replication, on primary or secondary servers?
> 
> No.  It just means WAL will occupy more disk space.  I've seen people go
> even as high as 5000 with no issues.

Yeah, though it makes the primary into essentially a WAL repository and,
really, you'd be better off having a dedicated repo that replicas can
pull from instead.  Consider that a replica might fall way behind and
then demand the primary send 5000 WAL segments to it.  The primary then
has to go pull that 80GB of data from disk and send it across the
network.  As to if that's an issue or not depends on the IOPS and
bandwidth available, of course, but it's not free.

Thanks,

Stephen
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления
От: Saurav Sarkar
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Indexes in JSONB
От: Philip Semanchuk
Дата:
FAQ