Re: PostgreSQL calibration

From: matt <matt(at)ymogen(dot)net>
To: pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL calibration
Date: 2003-06-18 17:36:44
Message-ID: 1055957804.3900.52.camel@gibraltar.mattclark.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin pgsql-general

Are there really any performance settings of much interest beyond the
shared and non-shared memory settings? Beyond those the interactions
get so complex that automation is probably impossible anyway, and
certain options like fsync = false should never be 'recommended'.

On the other hand, a way of empirically deriving some 'correct'
optimizer parameters for a given machine would be very nice :-)

Matt

On Wed, 2003-06-18 at 18:07, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > Sure, it would be great if we could do it.
>
> If the program actually derives reliable numbers, it would be great.
> It could easily do more harm than good if it gives bogus results.
> I think it will be very hard to get reliable rather than bogus results
> :-( ... but feel free to try.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message scott.marlowe 2003-06-18 17:42:11 Re: PostgreSQL calibration
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2003-06-18 17:28:30 Re: postgreSQL 7.3.3 crashing on server with Itanium processor...

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ivar 2003-06-18 17:37:32 Re: Is it bug ?
Previous Message scott.marlowe 2003-06-18 17:32:04 Re: A creepy story about dates. How to prevent it?