Re: Survey: Max TPS you've ever seen - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Gudmundsson Martin (mg)
Subject Re: Survey: Max TPS you've ever seen
Date
Msg-id 2E5766F28426E547AF0A2A870FAE630D32BAD8@SEGOTNC5182-N2.vcn.ds.volvo.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Survey: Max TPS you've ever seen  (Luis Antonio Dias de Sá Junior <luisjunior.sa@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Survey: Max TPS you've ever seen
List pgsql-performance
Hi all!

> - checkpoint_segments 1000
> - checkpoint_completion_target 0.9
> - wal_buffers  256MB
> - shared_buffers 31 gb
> - max_connections 500

I see that some of you are using wal_buffers = 256MB.
I was under the impression that Postgres will not benefit from higher value than the segment size, i.e. 16MB. More than
thatwill not do/help anything.
 

What's the reasoning behind setting it to higher than 16MB? Do I have old information?

Best regards, Martin

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Luis Antonio Dias de Sá Junior
Date:
Subject: Re: Survey: Max TPS you've ever seen
Next
From: "Graeme B. Bell"
Date:
Subject: Re: Survey: Max TPS you've ever seen