Re: A smaller default postgresql.conf

From: "Jaime Casanova" <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Robert Treat" <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, "Joshua Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Magnus Hagander" <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Hans-Juergen Schoenig" <postgres(at)cybertec(dot)at>
Subject: Re: A smaller default postgresql.conf
Date: 2008-08-20 06:22:26
Message-ID: 3073cc9b0808192322y72d9218bvbc39cfa2f9cd828@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 9:40 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> writes:
>> I'd still like to see us adopt the proposal from some time ago where
>> we stop commenting out the parameters at all, but short of that,
>> hiding options seems about the worst choice we could make.
>
> Well, there seems to be a very substantial body of opinion that says
> we *do* need to hide "uninteresting" options.
>

more to the point... not just "uninteresting" but "dangerous for the
uninformed" ones...
i have seen to many people turning off fsync in OLTP systems 'cause
someone tolds them that will improve speed...
and work_mem setted at 256Mb because that improves a bad query that
should be rewritten as something more sanely...

--
regards,
Jaime Casanova
Soporte y capacitación de PostgreSQL
Asesoría y desarrollo de sistemas
Guayaquil - Ecuador
Cel. (593) 87171157

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stephen R. van den Berg 2008-08-20 07:36:01 Re: Extending varlena
Previous Message Jaime Casanova 2008-08-20 05:18:48 Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make the pg_stat_activity view call a SRF