On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 12:28:14AM +0200, tutiluren@tutanota.com wrote:
> Sep 21, 2020, 7:53 PM by jd@commandprompt.com:
> See my comment about Google. The information is out there and easy to find.
>
> I guess I'm the worst idiot in the world, then, who can't DuckDuckGo (Google is
> evil) it even after 15 years.
>
> Seriously, I didn't type my feedback "for fun". It may be difficult for very
> intelligent people to understand (as often is the case, because you operate on
> a whole different level), but the performance-related PostgreSQL configuration
> options are a *nightmare* to me and many others. I spent *forever* reading
> about them and couldn't make any sense of it all. Each time I tried, I would
> give up, frustrated and angry, with no real clue what "magic numbers" it
> wanted.
>
> It's quite baffling to me how this can be so difficult for you all to
> understand. Even if we disregard the sheer intelligence factor, it's clear that
> users of PG don't have the same intimate knowledge of PG's internals as the PG
> developers, nor could possibly be expected to.
>
> As mentioned, I kept going back to the default configuration over and over
> again. Anyone who doesn't is either a genius or pretends/thinks that they
> understand it. (Or I'm extremely dumb.)
I think there is a clear dependency that people reading the docs,
particularly for performance purposes, must have an existing knowledge
of a lot of low-level things --- this could be the cause of your
frustration.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB https://enterprisedb.com
The usefulness of a cup is in its emptiness, Bruce Lee