Message-ID: <463616EB.3040800@modgraph-usa.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2007 09:18:51 -0700
From: "Craig A. James" <cjames@modgraph-usa.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070221)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com>
CC: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Feature Request --- was: PostgreSQL Performance Tuning
References: 
 <OFC96167D5.6BB63AC2-ON652572C9.003B5263-652572C9.003E4142@lntinfotech.com>
	<20070427143023.GA2422@mathom.us>
	<46323744.5020703@drivefaster.net>
	<200704271059.50265.josh@agliodbs.com>
	<Pine.GSO.4.64.0704292241270.1296@westnet.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.64.0704292241270.1296@westnet.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Greg Smith wrote:
> If you're going to the trouble of building a tool for offering 
> configuration advice, it can be widly more effective if you look inside 
> the database after it's got data in it, and preferably after it's been 
> running under load for a while, and make your recommendations based on 
> all that information.

There are two completely different problems that are getting mixed together in this discussion.   Several people have tried to distinguish them, but let's be explicit:

1. Generating a resonable starting configuration for neophyte users who have installed Postgres for the first time.

2. Generating an optimal configuration for a complex, running system that's loaded with data.

The first problem is easy: Any improvement would be welcome and would give most users a better initial experience.  The second problem is nearly impossible.  Forget the second problem (or put it on the "let's find someone doing a PhD project" list), and focus on the first.