On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 12:16:30PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 06:02:41AM +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > > Storage that has a low random read cost relative to sequential, e.g.
> > solid-state drives, might also be better modeled with a value that is close
> > to 1 for random_page_cost.
> >
> >
> > I depends on estimation. Lot of people use random_page_cost as fix of broken
> > estimation. Then configures this value to some strange values. Lot of other
> > queries with good estimation can be worse then.
>
> I have been recommending 1.1 as a value for random_page_cost for SSDs
> for years, and I think it would be helpful to suggest that value, so doc
> patch attached.
Patch applied back through 9.5.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB https://enterprisedb.com
+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +