| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Merlin Moncure <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com>, PostgresSQL Hackers Mailing List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Changing the default configuration (was Re: |
| Date: | 2003-02-11 21:13:37 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.44.0302112211150.7753-100000@peter.localdomain |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
Tom Lane writes:
> We could retarget to try to stay under SHMMAX=4M, which I think is
> the next boundary that's significant in terms of real-world platforms
> (isn't that the default SHMMAX on some BSDen?). That would allow us
> 350 or so shared_buffers, which is better, but still not really a
> serious choice for production work.
What is a serious choice for production work? And what is the ideal
choice? The answer probably involves some variables, but maybe we should
get values for those variables in each case and work from there.
--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Lamar Owen | 2003-02-11 21:53:39 | Re: Changing the default configuration (was Re: [pgsql-advocacy] |
| Previous Message | scott.marlowe | 2003-02-11 20:10:17 | Re: Changing the default configuration (was Re: |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joe Conway | 2003-02-11 21:32:18 | Re: new procedural language - PL/R |
| Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2003-02-11 20:36:52 | FW: Changing the default configuration (was Re: |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Lamar Owen | 2003-02-11 21:53:39 | Re: Changing the default configuration (was Re: [pgsql-advocacy] |
| Previous Message | scott.marlowe | 2003-02-11 20:10:17 | Re: Changing the default configuration (was Re: |