From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgresSQL Hackers Mailing List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Changing the default configuration (was Re: [pgsql-advocacy] |
Date: | 2003-02-11 18:55:29 |
Message-ID: | 27232.1044989729@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
"scott.marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> writes:
> Is setting the max connections to something like 200 reasonable, or likely
> to cause too many problems?
That would likely run into number-of-semaphores limitations (SEMMNI,
SEMMNS). We do not seem to have as good documentation about changing
that as we do about changing the SHMMAX setting, so I'm not sure I want
to buy into the "it's okay to expect people to fix this before they can
start Postgres the first time" argument here.
Also, max-connections doesn't silently skew your testing: if you need
to raise it, you *will* know it.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-02-11 19:06:32 | Re: Changing the default configuration (was Re: [pgsql-advocacy] PostgreSQL Benchmarks) |
Previous Message | Matthew T. O'Connor | 2003-02-11 18:53:51 | Re: Changing the default configuration (was Re: [pgsql-advocacy] |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-02-11 19:06:32 | Re: Changing the default configuration (was Re: [pgsql-advocacy] PostgreSQL Benchmarks) |
Previous Message | Robert Treat | 2003-02-11 18:55:08 | Re: location of the configuration files |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-02-11 19:06:32 | Re: Changing the default configuration (was Re: [pgsql-advocacy] PostgreSQL Benchmarks) |
Previous Message | Matthew T. O'Connor | 2003-02-11 18:53:51 | Re: Changing the default configuration (was Re: [pgsql-advocacy] |