Re: initdb profiles

From: aly(dot)dharshi(at)telus(dot)net
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: initdb profiles
Date: 2005-09-08 14:46:50
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.63.0509080842270.20725@edtnas67.telus.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hello All,

Please allow me to put a disclaimer, I am no serious PG hacker,
but would it be possible to allow for a simple config script to be run
(which would work even via /etc/init.d) which could be used to generate a
config file for initdb, which initdb could read and do its thing ?

This script could say do you wish to do a manual adjustment or
accept the default values, and then initdb could feed off that file. Does
this create too much work or is it disadvantageous.

Cheers,

Aly.

On Wed, 7 Sep 2005, Andrew Dunstan wrote:

>
>
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
>> Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>
>>> I accept the "run from init.d" argument. So then, is there a case for
>>> increasing the limits that initdb works with, to reflect the steep
>>> rise we have seen in typically available memory at the low end?
>>>
>>
>> There is a compromise that I think we cannot make. For production
>> deployment, shared buffers are typically sized at about 10% to 25% of
>> available phyiscal memory. I don't think we want to have a default
>> installation of PostgreSQL that takes 10% or more of memory just like that.
>> It just doesn't look good.
>>
>
> I have a single instance of apache running on this machine. It's not doing
> anything, but even so it's consuming 20% of physical memory. By contrast, my 3
> postmasters are each consuming 0.5% of memory. All with default settings. I
> don't think we are in any danger of looking bad for being greedy. If anything
> we are in far greater danger of looking bad from being far too conservative
> and paying a performance price for that. There's nothing magical about the
> numbers we use.
>
>> So the question whether initdb should by default consider up to 1000 or up
>> to 4000 buffers is still worth discussion, but doesn't solve the tuning
>> issue to a reasonable degree.
>>
>>
>>
>
> True, but that doesn't mean it's not worth doing anyway.
>
> cheers
>
> andrew
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
>

--
Aly S.P Dharshi
aly(dot)dharshi(at)telus(dot)net

"A good speech is like a good dress
that's short enough to be interesting
and long enough to cover the subject"

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message mark 2005-09-08 15:30:03 Re: uuid type for postgres
Previous Message Bricklen Anderson 2005-09-08 14:38:12 8.1beta timezone question