Re: Auto-tuning work_mem and maintenance_work_mem

On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 3:41 PM, Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 12:28 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
>> How do we handle the Python dependency, or is this all to be done in
>> some other language? I certainly am not ready to take on that job.
>
> I should think it possible to reimplement it in C. It was considerably
> useful to start by implementing in Python, as that evades various sorts
> of efforts needed in C (e.g. - memory allocation, picking a hash table
> implementation), and allows someone to hack on it without needing to
> run through a recompile every time something is touched.

Also, the last time I saw that tool, it output recommendations for
work_mem that I would never, ever recommend to anyone on a production
server - they were VERY high.

More generally, Josh has made repeated comments that various proposed
value/formulas for work_mem are too low, but obviously the people who
suggested them didn't think so. So I'm a bit concerned that we don't
all agree on what the end goal of this activity looks like.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company