"Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn@amazon.com> writes:
> I think the other side of this is that we don't want checkpointing to
> continually fail because of a noncritical failure. That could also
> lead to problems down the road.
Yeah, a persistent failure to complete checkpoints is very nasty.
Your disk will soon fill with unrecyclable WAL. I don't see how
that's better than a somewhat hypothetical performance issue.
regards, tom lane