Re: [HACKERS] WAL logging problem in 9.4.3?

On Mon, Dec 9, 2019 at 4:04 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
<horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yeah, only 0.5GB of shared_buffers makes the default value of
> wal_buffers reach to the heaven. I think I can take numbers on that
> condition. (I doubt that it's meaningful if I increase only
> wal_buffers manually.)

Heaven seems a bit exalted, but I think we really only have a formula
because somebody might have really small shared_buffers for some
reason and be unhappy about us gobbling up a comparatively large
amount of memory for WAL buffers. The current limit means that normal
installations get what they need without manual tuning, and small
installations - where performance presumably sucks anyway for other
reasons - keep a small memory footprint.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company