From: | Sandeep Srinivasa <sss(at)clearsenses(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Ma Sivakumar <masivakumar(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: MySQL versus Postgres |
Date: | 2010-08-12 05:35:55 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTikNa0jjSRks5gDep_mUnAvzMpFaKNjsx6B1-W13@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>
> If only it were that easy. 25%, but only on a dedicated server, don't go
> above 8GB, limit to much less than that on Windows, and be extremely careful
> if you're writing heavily lest large checkpoints squash you. Giving simple
> advice that people might follow without thinking about actually has some
> worst-case downsides that are worse than not tuning the server at all.
>
>
> This makes Increasing work_mem is a complex calculation for a new user
>> trying out PostgreSQL.
>>
>>
>
> Increasing work_mem is a complex calculation for everyone, not just new
> users. If it were easy for anyone, we'd just bottle whatever experts do
> into the software directly. I tried doing a round of that with pgtune, and
> it's still not quite right yet even after surveying everyone who had an
> opinion on the subject.
Maybe a tabular form would be nice - "work_mem" under a) windows < 8GB b)
windows > 8gb c) linux < 8gb d) linux > 8gb e) read-heavy f) write-heavy
g)log shipping enabled.... etc etc.
Rinse and repeat for all important parameters - in a wiki, you can do nifty
things like add footnotes, etc.
That would be awesome!
-Sandeep
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | John R Pierce | 2010-08-12 05:39:01 | Re: deadlock |
Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2010-08-12 05:23:44 | Re: MySQL versus Postgres |