Re: Changing the default configuration (was Re: [pgsql-advocacy] - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Changing the default configuration (was Re: [pgsql-advocacy]
Date
Msg-id 9700.1045105706@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Changing the default configuration (was Re: [pgsql-advocacy]  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> I know you like it in that range, and 4 or 8 MB of buffers by default
> should not be a problem.  But personally I think if the optimal buffer
> size does not depend on both the physical RAM you want to dedicate to
> PostgreSQL and the nature and size of the database, then we have achieved
> a medium revolution in computer science. ;-)

But this is not about "optimal" settings.  This is about "pretty good"
settings.  As long as we can get past the knee of the performance curve,
I think we've done what should be expected of a default parameter set.

I believe that 1000 buffers is enough to get past the knee in most
scenarios.  Again, I haven't got hard evidence, but that's my best
guess.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Christopher Kings-Lynne"
Date:
Subject: horology and time failures on freebsd/alpha
Next
From: Lamar Owen
Date:
Subject: Re: location of the configuration files