Re: random_page_cost = 2.0 on Heroku Postgres

Having read the thread, I don't really see how I could study what a
more principled value would be.

That said, I have access to a very large fleet in which to can collect
data so I'm all ears for suggestions about how to measure and would
gladly share the results with the list.

Peter

On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
>> On 2/7/12 4:59 PM, Peter van Hardenberg wrote:
>>> Per the thread from last month, I've updated the default
>>> random_page_cost on Heroku Postgres to reduce the expected cost of a
>>> random_page on all new databases.
>>
>> This is because Heroku uses AWS storage, which has fast seeks but poor
>> throughput compared to internal disk on a standard system, BTW.
>
> Also judging by the other thread, it might be something to stop closer
> to 1.2 to 1.4 or something.
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance

--
Peter van Hardenberg
San Francisco, California
"Everything was beautiful, and nothing hurt." -- Kurt Vonnegut