Re: [GENERAL] Multiple Indexing, performance impact
От
Peter Eisentraut
Тема
Re: [GENERAL] Multiple Indexing, performance impact
Дата
Msg-id
Pine.LNX.4.30.0106230115220.727-100000@peter.localdomain
Ответ на
Список
Дерево обсуждения
Re: [GENERAL] Multiple Indexing, performance impact Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [GENERAL] Multiple Indexing, performance impact Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
Tom Lane writes: > This does remind me that I'd been thinking of suggesting that we > raise the default -B to something more reasonable, maybe 1000 or so > (yielding an 8-meg-plus shared memory area). On Modern(tm) systems, 8 MB is just as arbitrary and undersized as 1 MB. So while for real use, manual tuning will still be necessary, on test systems we'd use significant amounts of memory for nothing, or not start up at all. Maybe we could look around what the default limit is these days, but raising it to arbitrary values will just paint over the fact that user intervention is still required and that there is almost no documentation for this. -- Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net http://funkturm.homeip.net/~peter
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления