From: | Joshua Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Daniel Farina <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com>, Shiv <rama(dot)theone(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: improvements to pgtune |
Date: | 2011-04-28 04:18:31 |
Message-ID: | 1388469010.173794.1303964311479.JavaMail.root@mail-1.01.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Every time I've gotten pulled into discussions of setting parameters
> based on live monitoring, it's turned into a giant black hole--absorbs a
> lot of energy, nothing useful escapes from it. I credit completely
> ignoring that idea altogether, and using the simplest possible static
> settings instead, as one reason I managed to ship code here that people
> find useful. I'm not closed to the idea, just not optimistic it will
> lead anywhere useful. That makes it hard to work on when there are so
> many obvious things guaranteed to improve the program that could be done
> instead.
What would you list as the main things pgtune doesn't cover right now? I have my own list, but I suspect that yours is somewhat different.
I do think that autotuning based on interrogating the database is possible. However, I think the way to make it not be a tar baby is to tackle it one setting at a time, and start with ones we have the most information for. One of the real challenges there is that some data can be gleaned from pg_* views, but a *lot* of useful performance data only shows up in the activity log, and then only if certain settings are enabled.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
San Francisco
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2011-04-28 04:24:10 | Re: unknown conversion %m |
Previous Message | Sim Zacks | 2011-04-28 04:17:38 | Re: Proposal - asynchronous functions |