From: | Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: proposal: Set effective_cache_size to greater of .conf value, shared_buffers |
Date: | 2013-01-08 14:53:29 |
Message-ID: | CAGTBQpZN56Unfs4wGiSkTyae0K9QXfqyjYsjazrX=ZoMp1OpMQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Reference: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Simple-join-doesn-t-use-index-td5738689.html
>
> This is a pretty common gotcha: user sets shared_buffers but misses
> the esoteric but important effective_cache_size. ISTM
> effective_cache_size should always be >= shared buffers -- this is a
> soft configuration error that could be reported as a warning and
> perhaps overridden on the fly.
Not true. If there are many concurrent users running concurrent
queries against parallel databases, such as some test systems I have
that contain many databases for many test environments, such a setting
wouldn't make sense. If a DBA sets it to lower than shared_buffers,
that setting has to be honored.
Rather, I'd propose the default setting should be "-1" or something
"default" and "automagic" that works most of the time (but not all).
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2013-01-08 14:58:51 | Re: json api WIP patch |
Previous Message | Claudio Freire | 2013-01-08 14:51:06 | Re: Improve compression speeds in pg_lzcompress.c |