Re[2]: [PERFORM] pgtune + configurations with 9.3 - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Alexey Vasiliev
Subject Re[2]: [PERFORM] pgtune + configurations with 9.3
Date
Msg-id 1415992224.324747668@f354.i.mail.ru
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pgtune + configurations with 9.3  (Shaun Thomas <sthomas@optionshouse.com>)
Responses Re: Re[2]: [PERFORM] pgtune + configurations with 9.3  (Stuart Bishop <stuart@stuartbishop.net>)
List pgsql-performance


Fri, 14 Nov 2014 17:06:54 +0000 от Shaun Thomas <sthomas@optionshouse.com>:
> Alexey,
>
> The issue is not that 8GB is the maximum. You *can* set it higher. What I'm saying, and I'm not alone in this, is
thatsetting it higher can actually decrease performance for various reasons. Setting it to 25% of memory on a system
with512GB of RAM for instance, would be tantamount to disaster. A checkpoint with a setting that high could overwhelm
prettymuch any disk controller and end up  completely ruining DB performance. And that's just *one* of the drawbacks. 
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________
>
> See http://www.peak6.com/email_disclaimer/ for terms and conditions related to this email
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
>

Ok. Just need to know what think another developers about this - should pgtune care about this case? Because I am not
sure,what users with 512GB will use pgtune. 

--
Alexey Vasiliev

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Shaun Thomas
Date:
Subject: Re: pgtune + configurations with 9.3
Next
From: Mark Kirkwood
Date:
Subject: Re: pgtune + configurations with 9.3