Re: pg_wal lifecycle
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_wal lifecycle |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5cd3241a-f1d3-9881-e3a2-823075d6d6c3@enterprisedb.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | pg_wal lifecycle (Luca Ferrari <fluca1978@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: pg_wal lifecycle
|
Список | pgsql-general |
On 13.07.21 09:07, Luca Ferrari wrote: > I'd like to see if I get it right about pg_wal: it grows up to pretty > much max_wal_size, at which point a checkpoint is triggered. > If the server triggers a timed checkpoint before the pg_wal is at > max_wal_size, the system recycles the wals thus keeping the pg_wal > size lower than max_wal_size. > Is this correct? In particular, what is in simple words, the > discrimination between recycling a segment and creating a new one? Recycling in this context just means that instead of creating a new WAL file for new WAL traffic, it reuses an old file. So if you have WAL files 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and you know that you don't need 5 and 6 anymore, when you need to start WAL file 10, instead of creating a new file "10", the system just renames "5" to "10" and starts overwriting what was in there. This is just an optimization to use the file system better; it doesn't affect the logical principles of what is going on.
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: