public inbox for [email protected]  
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
To: Nikolay Samokhvalov <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: effective_cache_size
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2018 11:12:31 -0500
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANNMO++QsKXLm1E=8uSnSJYgLC5ZJnAYxJZogTLfYdGUXrcV3g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<CANNMO++QsKXLm1E=8uSnSJYgLC5ZJnAYxJZogTLfYdGUXrcV3g@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Nov  5, 2018 at 03:23:03PM +0300, Nikolay Samokhvalov wrote:
> 
> 
> On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 3:01 PM Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>     > >             {"effective_cache_size", PGC_USERSET, QUERY_TUNING_COST,
>     > > -                   gettext_noop("Sets the planner's assumption about
>     the size of the disk cache."),
>     > > -                   gettext_noop("That is, the portion of the kernel's
>     disk cache that "
>     > > -                                            "will be used for
>     PostgreSQL data files. This is measured in disk "
>     > > -                                            "pages, which are normally
>     8 kB each."),
>     > > +                   gettext_noop("Sets the planner's assumption about
>     the size of the data cache."),
>     > > +                   gettext_noop("That is, the size of the cache used
>     for PostgreSQL data files. "
>     > > +                                            "This is measured in disk
>     pages, which are normally 8 kB each."),
> 
> ...
> 
>     Well, the change as outlined in the email is that effective_cache_size
>     is a combination of shared_buffers and kernel cache size, which I think
>     the docs now make clear.  Do you have better wording for the GUC?
> 
> 
> Maybe it's better to use this phrase, "a combination of shared_buffers and
> kernel cache size"?
> Or: "a combination of shared_buffers and estimated kernel cache size".

Well, here are the lines in guc.c:

            gettext_noop("Sets the planner's assumption about the size of the data cache."),
            gettext_noop("That is, the size of the cache used for PostgreSQL data files. "
                         "This is measured in disk pages, which are normally 8 kB each."),

The first line is already on the long side compared to other entries, as
is the second gettext_noop().  How long can we make it without being too
long?  Is this really the place to explain this distinction?  I thought
about these issues when I wrote this patch?  You can come to a different
conclusion, but please consider these issues.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <[email protected]>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

+ As you are, so once was I.  As I am, so you will be. +
+                      Ancient Roman grave inscription +




view thread (11+ messages)  latest in thread

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: effective_cache_size
  In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox