On Wed, 2025-12-17 at 12:21 -0500, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote: > On Wed, Dec 17, 2025 at 11:10 AM Colin 't Hart <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thanks Laurenz, that confirms what I was assuming. Archiving is via > > pgbackrest > > to a backup server, over SSH. Approx 750ms to archive each segment is crazy > > -- > > I'll check compression parameters too. > > Switch to archive-async = on. When doing that, the typical time drops to 10ms > or less. > Also use a compress-type of lz4 or zst, which perform way better than the > default gz. > If you are encrypting, that's a bottleneck you just have to deal with, no > shortcuts there. :)
I second that. Asynchronous archiving in pgBackRest tends to work around the problem. > tl;dr try other things before messing with the WAL size. The current size can > work very > well even on very large and very, very busy systems. On the other hand, 16MB on a very busy system is somewhat ridiculous. A somewhat bigger segment size may be appropriate. Yours, Laurenz Albe
