On 2013-09-13 10:50:06 -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> The stock documentation advice I probably needs to be revised to so
> that's the lesser of 2GB and 25%.
I think that would be a pretty bad idea. There are lots of workloads
where people have postgres happily chugging along with s_b lots bigger
than that and see benefits.
We have a couple people reporting mostly undiagnosed (because that turns
out to be hard!) problems that seem to be avoided with smaller s_b. We
don't even remotely know enough about the problem to make such general
recommendations.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
-- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services