Re: Auto-tuning work_mem and maintenance_work_mem - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Geoghegan
Subject Re: Auto-tuning work_mem and maintenance_work_mem
Date
Msg-id CAM3SWZT+v1GDkF2CHjZmWUS7ugtyFS3oWKm1nGkgmJg61__+OA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Auto-tuning work_mem and maintenance_work_mem  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 8:31 AM, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
>> Actually, I object to increasing work_mem by default. In my experience
>> most of the untuned servers are backing some kind of web application and
>> often run with far too many connections. Increasing work_mem for those
>> is dangerous.
>
> And I still disagree with this- even in those cases.  Those same untuned
> servers are running dirt-simple queries 90% of the time and they won't
> use any more memory from this, while the 10% of the queries which are
> more complicated will greatly improve.

+1


-- 
Peter Geoghegan



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Emre Hasegeli
Date:
Subject: Re: GiST support for inet datatypes
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: GiST support for inet datatypes