OS: Linux (Fedora 34)
PostgreSQL from: source code
Versions affected: 12.7, 13,2 & 14 Beta3
Hi,
I used pgtune to configure my system and received the following
recommendations: (most have been snipped for brevity):
...
...
min_wal_size = 1GB
max_wal_size = 4GB
...
max_worker_processes = 2
max_parallel_workers_per_gather = 1
max_parallel_workers = 2
max_parallel_maintenance_workers = 1
...
Now, I was going through my postgresql.conf file in accordance with
the recommendations and was changing the min_wal_size and max_wal_size
parameters.
However, in the .conf, the max_wal_size comes *_before_* the
min_wal_size and I nearly inverted my changes - i.e. setting the min
recommendation to the max one and vice versa.
Hardly a major issue, but in my opinion, it is *_totally_* illogical
to have the max_wal_size on the line above the min_wal_size. I propose
that this should be changed!
Also, with the max....workers... parameters
The untouched .conf file is as follows:
#max_worker_processes = 8 # (change requires restart)
#max_parallel_maintenance_workers = 2 # taken from max_parallel_workers
#max_parallel_workers_per_gather = 2 # taken from max_parallel_workers
#parallel_leader_participation = on
#max_parallel_workers = 8 # maximum number of
max_worker_processes that
# can be used in parallel operations
Now, max_worker_processes = 8 is fine, BUT, both the
max_parallel_maintenance_workers
and the
max_parallel_workers_per_gather
parameters depend on the max_parallel_workers parameter.
Surely then, the max_parallel_workers parameter should appear before
the two others which depend on it?
I realise that these are not show-stoppers but at least in the case of
the max_wal_ and min_wal_ size parameters, the inversion is a source
of cognitive dissonance which a simple swapping of their respective
positions would solve.
Should you require any further information, please don't hesitate to contact mej
Best regards,
Pól Ua Laoínecháin...
