* Joshua D. Drake (j...@commandprompt.com) wrote: > +1 for Robert here, removing async commit is a non-starter. It is > PostgreSQL performance 101 that you disable synchronous commit > unless you have a specific data/business requirement that needs it. > Specifically because of how much faster Pg is with async commit.
I agree that we don't want to get rid of async commit, but, for the archive, I wouldn't recommend using it unless you specifically understand and accept that trade-off, so I wouldn't lump it into a "PostgreSQL performance 101" group- that's increasing work_mem, shared_buffers, WAL size, etc. Accepting that you're going to lose *committed* transactions on a crash requires careful thought and consideration of what you're going to do when that happens, not the other way around. Thanks! Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
