Re: wal_sender_delay is still required? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Fujii Masao
Subject Re: wal_sender_delay is still required?
Date
Msg-id AANLkTinO2Xm9c+szttMc3WpeU_CfAcymZK7rQk_8mAn3@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: wal_sender_delay is still required?  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: wal_sender_delay is still required?  (Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 12:22 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Fair enough. How about increasing the default to 10 seconds?
>> Since bgwriter has already using 10s as a nap time if there is no
>> configured activity, I think that 10s is non-nonsense default value.
>
> What do we get out of making this non-configurable?

Which would make the setting of replication simpler, I think.
But I agree to just increase the default value of wal_sender_delay
rather than dropping it.

Regards,

-- 
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: wal_sender_delay is still required?
Next
From: Jim Nasby
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: Rethinking hint bits WAS: Protecting against unexpected zero-pages: proposal