Re: Proposal for CSN based snapshots - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Stephen Frost
Subject Re: Proposal for CSN based snapshots
Date
Msg-id 20160810160419.GH4028@tamriel.snowman.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Proposal for CSN based snapshots  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
Responses Re: Proposal for CSN based snapshots  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
* Joshua D. Drake (jd@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

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Slowness of extended protocol
Next
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: Slowness of extended protocol