Re: proposal: Set effective_cache_size to greater of .conf value, shared_buffers

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: proposal: Set effective_cache_size to greater of .conf value, shared_buffers
Date: 2013-09-13 16:07:56
Message-ID: 20130913160755.GD1320558@alap2.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2013-09-13 10:50:06 -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> The stock documentation advice I probably needs to be revised to so
> that's the lesser of 2GB and 25%.

I think that would be a pretty bad idea. There are lots of workloads
where people have postgres happily chugging along with s_b lots bigger
than that and see benefits.
We have a couple people reporting mostly undiagnosed (because that turns
out to be hard!) problems that seem to be avoided with smaller s_b. We
don't even remotely know enough about the problem to make such general
recommendations.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2013-09-13 16:23:47 Re: INSERT...ON DUPLICATE KEY LOCK FOR UPDATE
Previous Message Merlin Moncure 2013-09-13 15:50:06 Re: proposal: Set effective_cache_size to greater of .conf value, shared_buffers