Re: max_prepared_transactions default ... why 5?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Gregory Stark
Тема Re: max_prepared_transactions default ... why 5?
Дата
Msg-id 87ejfswfvw.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: max_prepared_transactions default ... why 5?  (Decibel! <decibel@decibel.org>)
Ответы Re: max_prepared_transactions default ... why 5?  ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>)
Список 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


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Gregory Stark
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Can a C function(server program) be a UDP or TCP server?
Следующее
От: "Billow Gao"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Can a C function(server program) be a UDP or TCP server?