From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Cc: Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com>
Cc: Andreas Pflug <pgadmin@pse-consulting.de>
Cc: Decibel! <decibel@decibel.org>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Subject: Re: Overhauling GUCS
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2008 14:39:31 +0200
Message-ID: <200806061439.32335.peter_e@gmx.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7473.1212625397@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <48409D1E.3070208@agliodbs.com>
<48472E47.7030701@dunslane.net>
<7473.1212625397@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Am Donnerstag, 5. Juni 2008 schrieb Tom Lane:
> How far could we get with the answers to just three questions:
>
> * How many concurrent queries do you expect to have?
>
> * How much RAM space are you willing to let Postgres use?
>
> * How much "overhead" disk space are you willing to let Postgres use?
This is surely a good start. We could optimize this even more by saying, disk
space is cheap, so let's just use a much higher default setting for
checkpoint_segments. (If PostgreSQL is installed but not actually used, not
all the space is actually going to be used anyway.) Then, increase
max_connections a bit; that should be OK for most users. Then you are left
with the memory settings, and those need kernel tuning in most cases, so any
automation tool loses. Hmm.
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: peter_e@gmx.net, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, andrew@dunslane.net, gsmith@gregsmith.com, pgadmin@pse-consulting.de, decibel@decibel.org, josh@agliodbs.com
Subject: Re: Overhauling GUCS
In-Reply-To: <200806061439.32335.peter_e@gmx.net>
* 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