Re: [HACKERS] Changing the default configuration

From: Daniel Kalchev <daniel(at)digsys(dot)bg>
To: Jason Hihn <jhihn(at)paytimepayroll(dot)com>
Cc: PostgresSQL Hackers Mailing List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Changing the default configuration
Date: 2003-02-14 08:00:28
Message-ID: 200302140800.h1E80SY04664@dcave.digsys.bg
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers

>>>Jason Hihn said:
> Pardon my ignorance, but there's no way to auto-tune? Ship it with a thread
> that gathers statistics and periodically re-tunes the database parameters.
> Of course, be able to turn it off. People that actually take the time to run
> tune manually will turn it off as to not have the overhead or interruption.
> Those that don't care about pg_tune shouldn't care about having a thread
> around retuning. Those that will care will tune manually.

This is related to my proposition, but trouble is, there is not such thing as
'well tuned database' that will suit all queries. You can tune the database to
the hardware for example (still remember that old argument on random access
and fast disks).

It seems the system could 'self-tune' itself on minor choices. I believe it
does this today for a number of things already. More significant changes
require the DBA consent and choice - but they need to be well informed of the
current usage statistics when making the choice.

Daniel

Responses

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Daniel Kalchev 2003-02-14 08:19:15 Re: [HACKERS] Changing the default configuration
Previous Message Daniel Kalchev 2003-02-14 07:55:12 Re: [HACKERS] Changing the default configuration

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paesold 2003-02-14 08:15:23 Re: Brain dump: btree collapsing
Previous Message Daniel Kalchev 2003-02-14 07:55:12 Re: [HACKERS] Changing the default configuration