Re: Overhauling GUCS

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com>, Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de>, Decibel! <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Overhauling GUCS
Date: 2008-06-10 18:23:04
Message-ID: 21875.1213122184@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
> Oh, and wal_buffers, the default for which we should just change if it
> weren't for SHMMAX.

Uh, why? On a workload of mostly small transactions, what value is
there in lots of wal_buffers?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff Davis 2008-06-10 18:32:40 Re: Proposal - improve eqsel estimates by including histogram bucket numdistinct statistics
Previous Message Tom Lane 2008-06-10 18:13:38 Re: [CORE] Automating our version-stamping a bit better