Re: postgresql.conf (Proposed settings)

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: mlw <markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: postgresql.conf (Proposed settings)
Date: 2001-11-21 18:55:07
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.30.0111202318300.613-100000@peter.localdomain
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

mlw writes:

> These are just ballpark settings, I don't even know how good they are. The problem
> is that server environments differ so greatly that there is no right answer.

Which is why this is clearly not a solution.

> I am just really concerned that the newbe PostgreSQL user will assume
> the performance they see with the default settings are what they will
> judge PostgreSQL.

For this kind of "newbie", the kind that doesn't read the documentation,
this would only make it worse, because they'd assume that by making the
choice between three default configurations they've done an adequate
amount of tuning. Basically, you'd exchange, "I can't find any tuning
information, but it's slow" for "I did all the tuning and it's still
slow". Not a good choice.

The bottom line is that you *must* edit postgresql.conf in order to tune
your server. If this editing is simplified it doesn't matter what the
default is.

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2001-11-21 18:55:20 Re: OCTET_LENGTH is wrong
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2001-11-21 18:54:38 Re: OCTET_LENGTH is wrong