From: | Justin Clift <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Spinlock performance improvement proposal |
Date: | 2001-10-01 13:48:19 |
Message-ID: | 3BB87423.99DAC24D@postgresql.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
>
<snip>
> I think the default NBuffers (64) is too low to give meaningful
> performance numbers, too. I've been thinking that maybe we should
> raise it to 1000 or so by default. This would trigger startup failures
> on platforms with small SHMMAX, but we could tell people to use -B until
> they get around to fixing their kernel settings. It's been a long time
> since we fit into a 1-MB shared memory segment at the default settings
> anyway, so maybe it's time to select somewhat-realistic defaults.
> What we have now is neither very useful nor the lowest common
> denominator...
How about a startup error message which gets displayed when used with
untuned settings (i.e. the default settings), maybe unless an option
like -q (quiet) is given?
My thought is the server should operate, but let the new/novice admin
know they need to configure PostgreSQL properly. Would probably be a
good reminder for experienced admins if they forget too.
Maybe something simple like pg_ctl shell script message, or something
proper like a postmaster start-up check.
This wouldn't break anything would it?
Regards and best wishes,
Justin Clift
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
--
"My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there."
- Indira Gandhi
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Lee Kindness | 2001-10-01 13:54:25 | Re: Bulkloading using COPY - ignore duplicates? |
Previous Message | Lee Kindness | 2001-10-01 13:40:07 | Re: Bulkloading using COPY - ignore duplicates? |