From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | <nickf(at)ontko(dot)com>, <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: A bit OT- RE: [PERFORM] Re-ordering .CONF params ... questions for this list |
Date: | 2003-06-16 16:28:07 |
Message-ID: | 200306160928.07521.josh@agliodbs.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
Nick,
> I agree... but are we the folks that the conf file needs to be made more
> intuitive for?
>
> If the intent is to make it easier for experienced folks like ourselves who
> are working with large or unusual databases to deal with PostgreSQL, then
> certainly the resource usage and tuning settings should go to the top.
> We'll set the other params once & never touch them again.
>
> On the other hand, I suspect that the majority of postgresql users play
> with the other params a bit during install to get their systems working and
> never touch the resource usage or tuning params ever. (And this is as it
> should be, given that the defaults are reasonable for most systems.)
This is a good argument. Though if you pursue it, surely you're advocating a
GUI tool for PostgreSQL.conf, not that that's a bad idea ...
How do other people feel about this? What options in PostgreSQL.conf do you
tweak most frequently?
--
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | scott.marlowe | 2003-06-16 18:38:30 | Re: Which database part 2 |
Previous Message | Jean-Michel POURE | 2003-06-16 15:25:48 | Re: PostgreSQL presentation at LSM |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-06-16 16:36:31 | Re: PostgreSQL and Windows |
Previous Message | Yurgis Baykshtis | 2003-06-16 16:21:33 | Re: PostgreSQL and Windows |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tomaz Borstnar | 2003-06-16 17:38:19 | functional indexes instead of regular index on field(s)? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-06-16 14:17:43 | Re: 7.3 vs 7.2 - different query plan, bad performance |