| From: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Jim Nasby <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: 8.2 is 30% better in pgbench than 8.3 |
| Date: | 2007-07-24 02:46:17 |
| Message-ID: | 87fy3er01y.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
>> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
>> >
>> > I am taking the liberty to also lower the vacuum and analyze threshold
>> > default values to 50, per previous discussion.
Did we also reach any consensus about lowering the percentage of dead tuples
in a table before we trigger vacuum? I think 20% is way too high and 5% is
saner. I actually think it would be better even lower but would be ok with 5%.
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2007-07-24 03:23:39 | Re: 8.2 is 30% better in pgbench than 8.3 |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2007-07-24 00:24:23 | Re: 8.2 is 30% better in pgbench than 8.3 |