Re: max_prepared_transactions default ... why 5? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Gregory Stark
Subject Re: max_prepared_transactions default ... why 5?
Date
Msg-id 87ejfswfvw.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: max_prepared_transactions default ... why 5?  (Decibel! <decibel@decibel.org>)
Responses Re: max_prepared_transactions default ... why 5?
List pgsql-hackers
"Decibel!" <decibel@decibel.org> writes:

> Actually, the amount of memory is a reason to default to 0, or change  the
> name, or put a big comment in the config, because I very often  saw databases
> where people had set this to a very high value under  the impression that it
> impacted prepared statements.

There's another cost associated with prepared transactions. If it's set to 0
then there's no real reason we need to wal log lock operations.


--  Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB          http://www.enterprisedb.com


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Gregory Stark
Date:
Subject: Re: Can a C function(server program) be a UDP or TCP server?
Next
From: "Billow Gao"
Date:
Subject: Re: Can a C function(server program) be a UDP or TCP server?