Re: Auto-tuning work_mem and maintenance_work_mem

On 2014-02-17 11:31:56 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Andres Freund (andres@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> > On 2014-02-16 21:26:47 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> > > I don't think anyone objected to increasing the defaults for work_mem
> > > and maintenance_work_mem by 4x, and a number of people were in favor,
> > > so I think we should go ahead and do that.  If you'd like to do the
> > > honors, by all means!
> > 
> > Actually, I object to increasing work_mem by default. In my experience
> > most of the untuned servers are backing some kind of web application and
> > often run with far too many connections. Increasing work_mem for those
> > is dangerous.
> 
> And I still disagree with this- even in those cases.  Those same untuned
> servers are running dirt-simple queries 90% of the time and they won't
> use any more memory from this, while the 10% of the queries which are
> more complicated will greatly improve.

Uh. Paging.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

-- Andres Freund                       http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services