Re: proposal: Set effective_cache_size to greater of .conf value, shared_buffers
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: proposal: Set effective_cache_size to greater of .conf value, shared_buffers |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 14627.1378399734@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: proposal: Set effective_cache_size to greater of .conf value, shared_buffers (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: proposal: Set effective_cache_size to greater of
.conf value, shared_buffers
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes: > On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 3:01 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: >> I have developed the attached patch which implements an auto-tuned >> effective_cache_size which is 4x the size of shared buffers. I had to >> set effective_cache_size to its old 128MB default so the EXPLAIN >> regression tests would pass unchanged. > That's not really autotuning though. ISTM that making the *default* 4 > x shared_buffers might make perfect sense, but do we really need to > hijack the value of "-1" for that? That might be useful for some time > when we have actual autotuning, that somehow inspects the system and > tunes it from there. Well, the real problem with this patch is that it documents what the auto-tuning algorithm is; without that commitment, just saying "-1 means autotune" might be fine. Did you consider the alternative of just tweaking initdb to insert a default for effective_cache_size that's 4x whatever it picks for shared_buffers? That would probably be about 3 lines of code, and it wouldn't nail down any particular server-side behavior. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: