On 7/24/25 13:50, Pierre Barre wrote:
It’s not “safe” or “unsafe”, there’s mountains of valid workloads which don’t
require synchronous_commit. Synchronous_commit don’t make your system
automatically safe either, and if that’s a requirement, there’s many
workarounds, as you suggested, it certainly doesn’t make the setup useless.
Best,
Pierre
On Thu, Jul 24, 2025, at 21:44, Nico Williams wrote:
On Fri, Jul 18, 2025 at 12:57:39PM +0200, Pierre Barre wrote:
- Postgres configured accordingly memory-wise as well as with
synchronous_commit = off, wal_init_zero = off and wal_recycle = off.
Bingo. That's why it's fast (synchronous_commit = off). It's also why
it's not safe _unless_ you have a local, fast, persistent ZIL device
(which I assume you don't).
Nico
--
This then begs the obvious question of how fast is this with
synchronous_commit = on?
