Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...

От: Tom Lane
Тема: Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...
Дата: ,
Msg-id: 27905.1057338917@sss.pgh.pa.us
(см: обсуждение, исходный текст)
Ответ на: Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Josh Berkus)
Список: pgsql-performance

Скрыть дерево обсуждения

Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Sean Chittenden, )
 Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Rod Taylor, )
  Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Sean Chittenden, )
 Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  ("scott.marlowe", )
  Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Brian Hirt, )
   Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Sean Chittenden, )
    Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Matthew Hixson, )
  Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Sean Chittenden, )
   Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Tom Lane, )
    Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Sean Chittenden, )
 Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  ("Michael Mattox", )
  Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Sean Chittenden, )
   Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Martin Foster, )
   Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Bruce Momjian, )
 Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Ron, )
 Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Tom Lane, )
  Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Sean Chittenden, )
   Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Rod Taylor, )
   Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Manfred Koizar, )
    Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Sean Chittenden, )
     Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Manfred Koizar, )
      Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Sean Chittenden, )
       Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Tom Lane, )
        Index correlation (was: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003... )  (Manfred Koizar, )
     Use of multipart index with "IN"  (Rob Messer, )
      Re: Use of multipart index with "IN"  (Tom Lane, )
 Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Josh Berkus, )
  Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Tom Lane, )
  Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Tom Lane, )
  Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Tom Lane, )
  Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Sean Chittenden, )
   Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Josh Berkus, )
    Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Sean Chittenden, )
     Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Josh Berkus, )
   Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  ("Matthew Nuzum", )
    Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Michael Pohl, )
     Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Martin Foster, )
     Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Bruce Momjian, )
    Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Chris Travers, )
     Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  ("Jim C. Nasby", )
   Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Andrew Sullivan, )
    Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  ("Matthew Nuzum", )
     Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  ("Michael Mattox", )
     Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Tom Lane, )
      Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Kaarel, )
       Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  ("scott.marlowe", )
        Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  (Martin Foster, )
  Re: Moving postgresql.conf tunables into 2003...  ("Matthew Nuzum", )

Josh Berkus <> writes:
> Tom Comments:
>> I was arguing awhile back for bumping the default shared_buffers up,
>> but the discussion trailed off with no real resolution.

> I think we ran up against the still far-too-low SHMMAX settings in most
> *nixes.   We could raise this default once we can supply a script which will
> help the user bump up the OS's memory settings at, say, initDB time.

Actually, I think it would not be hard to get initdb to test whether
larger shared-memory settings would work.  We could do something like
try -B of 64, 256, 512, 1024, and insert into postgresql.conf the
largest value that works.  I would want it to top out at a few thousand
at most, because I don't think a default installation should try to
commandeer the whole machine, but if we could get the typical
installation to be running with even 1000 buffers rather than 64,
we'd be *way* better off.  (See "Postgres vs MySQL" thread nearby.)

We could possibly also have initdb print some kind of message if it's
forced to use an unreasonably small value for shared_buffers, so that
people might have a clue that they need to do kernel reconfiguration.

Comments?

            regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-performance по дате сообщения:

От: "Bjoern Metzdorf"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: PostgreSQL vs. MySQL
От: Grega Bremec
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: PostgreSQL vs. MySQL