back in larger batches in the background. Often that will result in greatly reduced transaction latency, but there also are some cases, especially with workloads that are bigger than shared_buffers, but back in larger batches in the background. Often that will result in greatly reduced transaction latency, but there also are some cases, especially with workloads that are bigger than shared_buffers, but additional transactions become ready to commit within the given interval. However, it also increases latency by up to the commit_delay for each WAL flush. Because the delay is just wasted if no other transactions

back in larger batches in the background. Often that will result in greatly reduced transaction latency, but there also are some cases, especially with workloads that are bigger than shared_buffers, but back in larger batches in the background. Often that will result in greatly reduced transaction latency, but there also are some cases, especially with workloads that are bigger than shared_buffers, but additional transactions become ready to commit within the given in- terval. However, it also increases latency by up to the commit_delay for each WAL flush. Because the delay is just wasted if no other transactions

back in larger batches in the background. Often that will result in greatly reduced transaction latency, but there also are some cases, especially with workloads that are bigger than shared_buffers, but back in larger batches in the background. Often that will result in greatly reduced transaction latency, but there also are some cases, especially with workloads that are bigger than shared_buffers, but additional transactions become ready to commit within the given in- terval. However, it also increases latency by up to the commit_delay for each WAL flush. Because the delay is just wasted if no other transactions

back in larger batches in the background. Often that will result in greatly reduced transaction latency, but there also are some cases, especially with workloads that are bigger than shared_buffers, but back in larger batches in the background. Often that will result in greatly reduced transaction latency, but there also are some cases, especially with workloads that are bigger than shared_buffers, but additional transactions become ready to commit within the given interval. However, it also increases latency by up to the commit_delay for each WAL flush. Because the delay is just wasted if no other transactions

back in larger batches in the background. Often that will result in greatly reduced transaction latency, but there also are some cases, especially with workloads that are bigger than shared_buffers, but back in larger batches in the background. Often that will result in greatly reduced transaction latency, but there also are some cases, especially with workloads that are bigger than shared_buffers, but additional transactions become ready to commit within the given interval. However, it also increases latency by up to the commit_delay for each WAL flush. Because the delay is just wasted if no other transactions

back in larger batches in the background. Often that will result in greatly reduced transaction latency, but there also are some cases, especially with workloads that are bigger than shared_buffers, but back in larger batches in the background. Often that will result in greatly reduced transaction latency, but there also are some cases, especially with workloads that are bigger than shared_buffers, but additional transactions become ready to commit within the given in- terval. However, it also increases latency by up to the commit_delay for each WAL flush. Because the delay is just wasted if no other transactions

back in larger batches in the background. Often that will result in greatly reduced transaction latency, but there also are some cases, especially with workloads that are bigger than shared_buffers, but back in larger batches in the background. Often that will result in greatly reduced transaction latency, but there also are some cases, especially with workloads that are bigger than shared_buffers, but additional transactions become ready to commit within the given in- terval. However, it also increases latency by up to the commit_delay for each WAL flush. Because the delay is just wasted if no other transactions

back in larger batches in the background. Often that will result in greatly reduced transaction latency, but there also are some cases, especially with workloads that are bigger than shared_buffers, but back in larger batches in the background. Often that will result in greatly reduced transaction latency, but there also are some cases, especially with workloads that are bigger than shared_buffers, but additional transactions become ready to commit within the given interval. However, it also increases latency by up to the commit_delay for each WAL flush. Because the delay is just wasted if no other transactions

back in larger batches in the background. Often that will result in greatly reduced transaction latency, but there also are some cases, especially with workloads that are bigger than shared_buffers, but back in larger batches in the background. Often that will result in greatly reduced transaction latency, but there also are some cases, especially with workloads that are bigger than shared_buffers, but additional transactions become ready to commit within the given interval. However, it also increases latency by up to commit_delay microsec- onds for each WAL flush. Because the delay is just wasted if no other

back in larger batches in the background. Often that will result in greatly reduced transaction latency, but there also are some cases, espe- cially with workloads that are bigger than shared_buffers, back in larger batches in the background. Often that will result in greatly reduced transaction latency, but there also are some 531 Chapter 19. Server Configuration cases, especially with workloads additional transactions become ready to commit within the given interval. However, it also increases latency by up to commit_delay microseconds for each WAL flush. Because the delay is just wasted if no other