Re: Lowering the default wal_blocksize to 4K - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andy Pogrebnoi
Subject Re: Lowering the default wal_blocksize to 4K
Date
Msg-id CA+aWR11mKA=kFGxX++6uMAhhqzRPU72ktd9TnhbD3O8OnR_Org@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Lowering the default wal_blocksize to 4K  (Andrew Pogrebnoi <andrew.pogrebnoi@percona.com>)
Responses Re: Lowering the default wal_blocksize to 4K
Re: Lowering the default wal_blocksize to 4K
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

The Windows tests are failing on `Assert("check_GUC_init(hentry->gucvar)")` for wal_writer_flush_after [1]. It doesn't make much sense to me as both load- and C-value for the wal_writer_flush_after GUC are the same constant:

src/backend/utils/misc/guc_parameters.dat:
{ name => 'wal_writer_flush_after', type => 'int', context => 'PGC_SIGHUP', group => 'WAL_SETTINGS',
  short_desc => 'Amount of WAL written out by WAL writer that triggers a flush.',
  flags => 'GUC_UNIT_XBLOCKS',
  variable => 'WalWriterFlushAfter',
  boot_val => 'DEFAULT_WAL_WRITER_FLUSH_AFTER',
  min => '0',
  max => 'INT_MAX',
},

src/include/postmaster/walwriter.h:
int WalWriterFlushAfter = DEFAULT_WAL_WRITER_FLUSH_AFTER;

This constant was introduced to fix the same issue [2], but I suppose no one checked Windows builds. Windows clearly has an old 8kB value for WalWriterFlushAfter during the check. I suppose it is something with the CI/build. But I have zero experience with building anything for Windows, so any tips on where to look are welcome.

*And apologies for the dreadful formatting in my previous email; the client plays tricks on me after I hit Send.

[1] https://cirrus-ci.com/task/6286650038288384?logs=test_world#L2728-L2729
[2] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA+hUKGLNmLV=VrT==5MqnbARgx2ifRSFtdd8ofdfrdSLL3yv5A@mail.gmail.com

---
Cheers,
Andy

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Zsolt Parragi
Date:
Subject: [oauth] Bug: when is shutdown_cb called?
Next
From: tushar
Date:
Subject: Re: Non-text mode for pg_dumpall