Re: Bump default wal_level to logical - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: Bump default wal_level to logical
Date
Msg-id 20200608213215.mgk3cctlzvfuaqm6@alap3.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Bump default wal_level to logical  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Bump default wal_level to logical  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>)
Re: Bump default wal_level to logical  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

On 2020-06-08 13:27:50 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> If we can allow wal_level to be changed on the fly, I agree that would
> help reduce the pressure to make the default setting more expensive.
> I don't recall why it's PGC_POSTMASTER right now, but I suppose there
> was a reason for that ...

There's reasons, but IIRC they're all solvable with reasonable effort. I
think most of it boils down to only being able to rely on the new
wal_level after a while. For minimal->recovery we basically need a
checkpoint started after the change in configuration, and for
recovery->logical we need to wait until all sessions have a) read the
new config setting b) finished the transaction that used the old
setting.

Greetings,

Andres Freund



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Justin Pryzby
Date:
Subject: Re: proposal: possibility to read dumped table's name from file
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: valgrind versus pg_atomic_init()