From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Greg Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: from_collapse_limit vs. geqo_threshold |
Date: | 2009-05-21 13:38:12 |
Message-ID: | 603c8f070905210638h2e60068fw7efcb96427eb84c5@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 8:51 AM, Greg Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> Having just raised the statistics targets I wonder if we should look
> at raising these two parameters too. The experience on the lists are
> that when people run into either of these two limits we recommend
> raising them and we've never seen anyone come back complaining that
> their planning time goes through the roof.
>
> To benchmark this like we did for the statistics target will be tricky
> though. I suppose we can gather candidate queries by trolling the
> lists for recommendations, though we didn't always get schemas to go
> along with the queries.
I think that's a good idea, too, but it's unrelated to the question of
which one should be set to the higher value.
...Robert
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2009-05-21 13:53:45 | Re: psql is broken in 8.4 |
Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2009-05-21 12:51:20 | Re: from_collapse_limit vs. geqo_threshold |