Re: Checkpoint Tuning Question

> Hm, I'm not sure I believe any of that except the last bit, seeing that
> he's got plenty of excess CPU capability.  But the last bit fits with
> the wimpy-I/O problem, and it also offers something we could test.
> Dan, please see what happens when you vary the wal_buffers setting.
> (Note you need a postmaster restart to change that.)
>
>                        regards, tom lane
>

Ok, I tried a few different values - 32kb, 64kb, 512kb, 2MB and 10MB.

I'm not seeing any highly noticeable change in behaviour with any
setting - it wasn't a scientific test, but I seem to have about the
same size hiccup with each setting.  The hiccup may be slightly
shorter with the 10MB setting, but barely, if it is.

Thanks,

Dan