Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: LIMIT confuses the planner

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: kouber(at)saparev(dot)com
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: LIMIT confuses the planner
Date: 2009-02-23 14:53:41
Message-ID: 603c8f070902230653v346f5b5cm6aeceedce7903f5@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 7:26 AM, Kouber Saparev <kouber(at)saparev(dot)com> wrote:
> Now, recently I have altered some of the default parameters in order to get
> as much as possible out of the hardware - 12 GB of RAM, 8 processors. So, I
> guess I have done something wrong, thus the planner is taking that wrong
> decision. Here's what I have changed in postgresql.conf (from the default
> one):
>
> max_connections = 200
> shared_buffers = 256MB
> work_mem = 64MB
> maintenance_work_mem = 128MB
> max_stack_depth = 6MB
> max_fsm_pages = 100000
> synchronous_commit = off
> wal_buffers = 1MB
> commit_delay = 100
> commit_siblings = 5
> checkpoint_segments = 10
> checkpoint_timeout = 10min
> random_page_cost = 0.1
> effective_cache_size = 2048MB
>
> Any idea what's wrong here?

If you left seq_page_cost (which isn't mentioned here) at the default
value but reduced random_page_cost to 0.1, then you have
random_page_cost < seq_page_cost.  That's probably Bad.

...Robert

In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2009-02-23 15:09:49
Subject: Re: LIMIT confuses the planner
Previous:From: Richard HuxtonDate: 2009-02-23 13:27:44
Subject: Re: LIMIT confuses the planner

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group