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

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: proposal: Set effective_cache_size to greater of .conf value, shared_buffers
Date: 2014-05-07 17:31:17
Message-ID: 536A6DE5.3030908@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 05/07/2014 07:31 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:

> +1. If we ever want to implement an auto-tuning heuristic it seems we're
> going to need some hard empirical evidence to support it, and that
> doesn't seem likely to appear any time soon.

4GB default it is, then.

--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2014-05-07 17:34:21 Re: 9.4 checksum errors in recovery with gin index
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2014-05-07 17:23:48 Re: [v9.5] Custom Plan API