Re: "--tuning" compile and runtime option (?)

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Justin Clift <jclift(at)iprimus(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: "--tuning" compile and runtime option (?)
Date: 2001-04-09 17:44:40
Message-ID: 200104091744.NAA12563@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> Hi Bruce,
>
> My thought on this is more for an "overall effect".
>
> Down The Track (i.e. in a few versions or so) I'm thinking, rightly or
> wrongly, that PostgreSQL will become Very Good at tuning itself.
>
> It would be a good thing if PostgreSQL could know just how fair it can
> play in regards to the server it's working on.

OK, what options would you recommend be auto-tuned in each circumstance?
I can imagine open files and maybe sortmemory, but even then, other
backends can affect the proper value. Share memory usually has a kernel
limit which prevents us from auto-tuning that too much.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2001-04-09 17:48:27 Re: timeout on lock feature
Previous Message Justin Clift 2001-04-09 17:16:43 Re: "--tuning" compile and runtime option (?)