Re: Multiple Indexing, performance impact

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Daniel Åkerud <zilch(at)home(dot)se>, PostgreSQL-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Multiple Indexing, performance impact
Date: 2001-06-22 22:06:38
Message-ID: 200106222206.f5MM6cI26794@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> >> This does remind me that I'd been thinking of suggesting that we
> >> raise the default -B to something more reasonable, maybe 1000 or so
> >> (yielding an 8-meg-plus shared memory area).
>
> > BSD/OS has a 4MB max but we document how to increase it by recompiling
> > the kernel.
>
> Hmm. Anyone like the idea of a platform-specific default established
> by configure? We could set it in the template file on platforms where
> the default SHMMAX is too small to allow 1000 buffers.

Template file seems like a good idea for platforms that can't handle the
default. I don't think configure should be doing such tests because the
target could be a different kernel.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2001-06-22 22:12:47 Re: Multiple Indexing, performance impact
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-06-22 22:02:45 Re: Multiple Indexing, performance impact

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2001-06-22 22:12:47 Re: Multiple Indexing, performance impact
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-06-22 22:02:45 Re: Multiple Indexing, performance impact