| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Arthur Silva <arthurprs(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Gregory Smith <gregsmithpgsql(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Fixed xloginsert_locks for 9.4 |
| Date: | 2014-10-03 18:10:46 |
| Message-ID: | 20141003181046.GG14522@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 02:07:45PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 03:00:56PM -0300, Arthur Silva wrote:
> > I remember Informix had a setting that had no description except "try
> > different values to see if it helps performance" --- we don't want to do
> > that.
> >
> > What if we emit a server message if the setting is too low? That's how
> > we handle checkpoint_segments.
> >
> > Not all GUC need to be straight forward to tune.
> > If the gains are worthy I don't see any reason not to have it.
>
> Every GUC add complexity to the system because people have to understand
> it to know if they should tune it. No GUC is zero-cost.
Please see my blog post about the cost of adding GUCs:
http://momjian.us/main/blogs/pgblog/2009.html#January_10_2009
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ Everyone has their own god. +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2014-10-03 18:19:20 | Re: [RFC] Incremental backup v2: add backup profile to base backup |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2014-10-03 18:07:45 | Re: Fixed xloginsert_locks for 9.4 |