> "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Here's a question then - what is the _drawback_ to having 1024 > wal_buffers > > as opposed to 8? > > Waste of RAM? You'd be better off leaving that 8 meg available for use > as general-purpose buffers ...
What I mean is say you have an enterprise server doing heaps of transactions with lots of work. If you have scads of RAM, could you just shove up wal_buffers really high and assume it will improve performance? Chris ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
