On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 10:01 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
>> Andrew did the research to support a higher value, but even 10 should
>> be an improvement over what we have now.
>
> Yes, I saw that, but I didn't see him recommend an actual number. Can
> someone recommend a number now? Tom initially recommended 10, but
> Andrew's tests suggest something > 100. Tom didn't do any tests so I
> tend to favor Andrew's suggestion, if he has one.
In the OP, he suggested "on the order of 100". Maybe we could just go with 100.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
