From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: shared_buffers documentation |
Date: | 2010-04-14 17:36:50 |
Message-ID: | s2u603c8f071004141036x80839436qf86b6bcf4a4df6ba@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 11:15 AM, Kevin Grittner
<Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> I think this advice is badly outdated.
>
> Yeah.
>
>> s/tens/hundreds/ might be a good idea at a minimum,
>
> +1
>
>> but I'm thinking we might want to also mention the
>> one-quarter-of-system-memory heuristic.
>
> Given how many people seem to find that a good guideline, it seems
> like we should. I wonder if we should add any hints telling people
> what they might see as problems if they are too far one way or the
> other. (Or does that go beyond the scope of what makes sense in
> TFM?)
No, I think that would be reasonable provided someone can come up with
some appropriate wording. My understanding is that if you have a
really small system then you might need >25% and if you have a really
big system you might need <25%, but I'm not sure where the edges are.
...Robert
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2010-04-14 18:04:02 | Re: shared_buffers documentation |
Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2010-04-14 16:01:52 | Re: Timezone matching script (win32) |