Re: confusing checkpoint_flush_after / bgwriter_flush_after - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: confusing checkpoint_flush_after / bgwriter_flush_after
Date
Msg-id 27423.1480093834@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: confusing checkpoint_flush_after / bgwriter_flush_after  (Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>)
Responses Re: confusing checkpoint_flush_after / bgwriter_flush_after  (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr> writes:
>> #checkpoint_flush_after = 0   # 0 disables,
>>                               # default is 256kB on linux, 0 otherwise

>> I find this pretty confusing, because for all other GUCs in the file, the 
>> commented-out value is the default one. In this case that would mean "0", 
>> disabling the flushing.

> Although I understand the issue, I'm not sure about -1 as a special value 
> to mean the default.

Agreed --- I think that's making things more confusing not less.

What we do in some similar cases is put the burden on initdb to fill in
the correct value by modifying postgresql.conf.sample appropriately.
It seems like that could be done easily here too.  And it'd be a
back-patchable fix.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Craig Ringer
Date:
Subject: Re: proposal: session server side variables
Next
From: Corey Huinker
Date:
Subject: Re: make default TABLESPACE belong to target table.