From: | Marti Raudsepp <marti(at)juffo(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)postnewspapers(dot)com(dot)au> |
Cc: | felix <crucialfelix(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Really really slow select count(*) |
Date: | 2011-02-07 10:30:25 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTi=TO=pCTgbWfJzHmmtbrY-sWi6nYG2e-5Kyhxdp@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 05:03, Craig Ringer <craig(at)postnewspapers(dot)com(dot)au> wrote:
> What would possibly help would be if Pg could fall back to lower
> shared_buffers automatically, screaming about it in the logs but still
> launching. OTOH, many people don't check the logs, so they'd think their
> new setting had taken effect and it hadn't - you've traded one usability
> problem for another. Even if Pg issued WARNING messages to each client
> that connected, lots of (non-psql) clients don't display them, so many
> users would never know.
>
> Do you have a suggestion about how to do this better? The current
> approach is known to be rather unlovely, but nobody's come up with a
> better one that works reasonably and doesn't trample on other System V
> shared memory users that may exist on the system.
We could do something similar to what Apache does -- provide distros
with a binary to check the configuration file in advance. This check
program is launched before the "restart" command, and if it fails, the
server is not restarted.
Regards,
Marti
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Marti Raudsepp | 2011-02-07 10:47:26 | Re: Different execution plans for semantically equivalent queries |
Previous Message | Vitalii Tymchyshyn | 2011-02-07 10:02:57 | Re: getting the most of out multi-core systems for repeated complex SELECT statements |