Re: CommitDelay performance improvement
От | ncm@zembu.com (Nathan Myers) |
---|---|
Тема | Re: CommitDelay performance improvement |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20010223172046.V624@store.zembu.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: CommitDelay performance improvement (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: CommitDelay performance improvement
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Feb 23, 2001 at 06:37:06PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > When thinking about tuning N, I like to consider what are the interesting > > possible values for N: > > > > 0: Ignore any other potential committers. > > 1: The minimum possible responsiveness to other committers. > > 5: Tom's guess for what might be a good choice. > > 10: Harry's guess. > > ~0: Always delay. > > > > I would rather release with N=1 than with 0, because it actually > > responds to conditions. What N might best be, >1, probably varies on > > a lot of hard-to-guess parameters. > > > > It seems to me that comparing various choices (and other, more > > interesting, algorithms) to the N=1 case would be more productive > > than comparing them to the N=0 case, so releasing at N=1 would yield > > better statistics for actually tuning in 7.2. > > We don't release code because it has better tuning opportunities for > later releases. What we can do is give people parameters where the > default is safe, and they can play and report to us. Perhaps I misunderstood. I had perceived N=1 as a conservative choice that was nevertheless preferable to N=0. Nathan Myers ncm@zembu.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: