From: Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>
To: David E. Wheeler <david@kineticode.com>
Cc: Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Overhauling GUCS
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 22:31:27 +0200
Message-ID: <162867790806041331rce6eb94pb5d31b26892329ea@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <72DA5875-8E89-4A6F-8D0B-7F9A869D79B9@kineticode.com>
References: <48409D1E.3070208@agliodbs.com>
<484418D9.5040608@sun.com>
<Pine.GSO.4.64.0806021227100.4018@westnet.com>
<200806021106.05833.josh@agliodbs.com>
<0B854D92-C5C2-4138-A0FE-F81892A33869@sun.com>
<Pine.GSO.4.64.0806032324550.10282@westnet.com>
<72DA5875-8E89-4A6F-8D0B-7F9A869D79B9@kineticode.com>
2008/6/4 David E. Wheeler <david@kineticode.com>:
> On Jun 3, 2008, at 20:48, Greg Smith wrote:
>
>> Correct, but completely off-topic regardless. One problem to be solved
>> here is to take PostgreSQL tuning from zero to, say, 50% automatic. Wander
>> the user lists for a few months; the number of completely misconfigured
>> systems out there is considerable, partly because the default values for
>> many parameters are completely unreasonable for modern hardware and there's
>> no easy way to improve on that without someone educating themselves.
>> Getting distracted by the requirements of the high-end systems will give
>> you a problem you have no hope of executing in a reasonable time period.
>
> Exactly. The issue is that application developers, who are not DBAs, have no
> idea how to tune PostgreSQL, and postgresql.conf is daunting and confusing.
> So they use a different database that's "faster".
>
do you thing, so any better config can help? It's not possible. And
you can't tune database without well knowledge of applications that
use database. Any automatic tools are joy for child. But some default
PostgreSQL parameters are not optimal.
> I think that right now postgresql.conf is designed for full-time DBAs,
> rather than folks who might want to target PostgreSQL for an application
> they're developing. We want to attract the latter (without, of course, any
> expense with the former). Changing how configuration works so that it's
> easier to understand and, if possible, at least partly automatically tunable
> would go a long way towards making PostgreSQL friendlier for developers,
> IMHO.
>
> Best,
>
> David
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
>
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: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: pavel.stehule@gmail.com, david@kineticode.com, gsmith@gregsmith.com, josh@agliodbs.com
Subject: Re: Overhauling GUCS
In-Reply-To: <162867790806041331rce6eb94pb5d31b26892329ea@mail.gmail.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox