From: | "Michael Nacos" <m(dot)nacos(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Gregory Stark" <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Greg Smith" <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Auto-tuning GUCS |
Date: | 2008-08-19 09:16:20 |
Message-ID: | 407fa4640808190216i1ec20c0ax1bda8879b46f86aa@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > I do think you and others make it less likely every time you throw up big
> > insoluble problems like above though. As a consequence every proposal has
> > started with big overly-complex solutions trying to solve all these
> incidental
> > issues which never go anywhere instead of simple solutions which directly
> > tackle the main problem.
>
insoluble? overly-complex solution? parsing a text file? I do not think we
understand
each other, or rather we start with totally different assumptions and design
goals.
it was probably a mistake to post keeping the subject line as it is,
considering I have
no interest overhauling GUCS, but this is where the subject of autotuning
was brought
up and this is where I posted.
now, to me, shell access, cron jobs, text config files - or rather, a single
text config
file, these are all good. if you plan to deploy/maintain entire farms or
cloud solutions,
tough! you should be looking into configuration management, such as cfengine
and
puppet already!
you seem to consider ease of use a prerequisite for tuning efficiency, our
design goals
couldn't be more different. what you want is an installer - what I'd like is
DBA support
>Coping with user and system-generated comments is one difficult part that
people
>normally don't consider, dealing with bad settings the server won't start
with is another.
now, as things stand, I will tinker in this area, simply because I'm
stubborn and this is
part of my job. I have parsed many text files in my professional career,
please do not
think a simple config file should be a problem (even with comments, I think)
The impression I get every time this comes up is that various people
> have different problems they want to solve that (they think) require
> redesign of the way GUC works. Those complicated solutions arise from
> attempting to satisfy N different demands simultaneously. The fact that
> many of these goals aren't subscribed to by the whole community to begin
> with doesn't help to ease resolution of the issues.
>
in this single thread I have identified at least three different development
targets:
* newbie-friendly default-guessing installer
* configuration manager for farms/clouds etc.
* auto-tuning support
this is why I'm posting this with a different subject line. If anyone wants
to discuss the
GUCS auto-tuning part, I'm all ears.
regards,
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2008-08-19 09:24:24 | Re: possible minor EXPLAIN bug? |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2008-08-19 09:14:47 | Re: Overhauling GUCS |