Re: Why is wal_writer_delay limited to 10s?
От | Peter Geoghegan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Why is wal_writer_delay limited to 10s? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAEYLb_WQ9B+wZZrJC4=erJqqmf=NHS+SMoOZfORL=mYK=MNBRQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Why is wal_writer_delay limited to 10s? (Clemens Eisserer <linuxhippy@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Why is wal_writer_delay limited to 10s?
Re: Why is wal_writer_delay limited to 10s? |
Список | pgsql-general |
On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 3:40 PM, Clemens Eisserer <linuxhippy@gmail.com> wrote: > Something like wal_writer_delay=600s would be ideal, I can afford to > loose a 10min of data, but can't afford to get a corrupted database > after power loss. What Postgres version? The WAL Writer will hibernate on Postgres 9.2+. walwriter.c says: /* * Number of do-nothing loops before lengthening the delay time, and the * multiplier to apply to WalWriterDelay when we do decide to hibernate. * (Perhaps these need to be configurable?) */ #define LOOPS_UNTIL_HIBERNATE 50 #define HIBERNATE_FACTOR 25 -- Regards, Peter Geoghegan
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: