| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Auto-tuning work_mem and maintenance_work_mem |
| Date: | 2014-02-17 16:33:51 |
| Message-ID: | 20140217163351.GG18388@awork2.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2014-02-17 11:31:56 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Andres Freund (andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com) wrote:
> > On 2014-02-16 21:26:47 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> > > I don't think anyone objected to increasing the defaults for work_mem
> > > and maintenance_work_mem by 4x, and a number of people were in favor,
> > > so I think we should go ahead and do that. If you'd like to do the
> > > honors, by all means!
> >
> > Actually, I object to increasing work_mem by default. In my experience
> > most of the untuned servers are backing some kind of web application and
> > often run with far too many connections. Increasing work_mem for those
> > is dangerous.
>
> And I still disagree with this- even in those cases. Those same untuned
> servers are running dirt-simple queries 90% of the time and they won't
> use any more memory from this, while the 10% of the queries which are
> more complicated will greatly improve.
Uh. Paging.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | MauMau | 2014-02-17 16:35:52 | Re: Do you know the reason for increased max latency due to xlog scaling? |
| Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2014-02-17 16:31:56 | Re: Auto-tuning work_mem and maintenance_work_mem |