Re: max_wal_senders must die - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: max_wal_senders must die
Date
Msg-id 7445.1287516777@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: max_wal_senders must die  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: max_wal_senders must die
Re: max_wal_senders must die
Re: max_wal_senders must die
List pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:
>> On 10/19/2010 09:06 AM, Greg Smith wrote:
>>> I think Magnus's idea to bump the default to 5 triages the worst of the
>>> annoyance here, without dropping the feature (which has uses) or waiting
>>> for new development to complete.

> Setting max_wal_senders to a non-zero value causes additional work to
> be done every time a transaction commits, aborts, or is prepared.

Yes.  This isn't just a numeric parameter; it's also a boolean
indicating "do I want to pay the overhead to be prepared to be a
replication master?".  Josh has completely failed to make a case that
that should be the default.  In fact, the system would fail to start
at all if we just changed the default for max_wal_senders and not the
default for wal_level.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: gist DatumGetPointer returns pointer to corrupted data
Next
From: "David E. Wheeler"
Date:
Subject: Re: patch: Add JSON datatype to PostgreSQL (GSoC, WIP)