From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, MauMau <maumau307(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Auto-tuning work_mem and maintenance_work_mem |
Date: | 2013-10-15 17:26:11 |
Message-ID: | 20131015172611.GO5300@awork2.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2013-10-15 10:19:06 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 10/15/2013 05:52 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > But the argument about being friendly for new users should definitely
> > have us change wal_level and max_wal_senders.
>
> +1 for having replication supported out-of-the-box aside from pg_hba.conf.
>
> To put it another way: users are more likely to care about replication
> than they are about IO overhead on a non-replicated server. And for the
> users who care about IO overhead, they are more likely to much about in
> pg.conf *anyway* in order to set a slew of performance-tuning settings.
But it will hurt people restoring backups using pg_restore -j. I think
people might be rather dissapointed if that slows down by a factor of
three.
I think we really need to get to the point where we increase the wal
level ondemand...
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2013-10-15 17:29:34 | Re: INSERT...ON DUPLICATE KEY LOCK FOR UPDATE |
Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2013-10-15 17:19:17 | Re: INSERT...ON DUPLICATE KEY LOCK FOR UPDATE |