On 05/06/2014 10:35 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> +1. In my view, we probably should have set it to a much higher
> absolute default value. The main problem with setting it to any
> multiple of shared_buffers that I can see is that shared_buffers is a
> very poor proxy for what effective_cache_size is supposed to
> represent. In general, the folk wisdom around sizing shared_buffers
> has past its sell-by date.
Unfortunately nobody has the time/resources to do the kind of testing
required for a new recommendation for shared_buffers.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
