Re: [PATCHES] default resource limits

Tom Lane wrote:

>I was thinking of a linear factor plus clamps to minimum and maximum
>values --- does that make it work any better?
>  
>

Can you suggest some factor/clamp values? Obviously it would be 
reasonable to set the max clamp at the max shared_buffers size we would 
test in the next step, but I'm not sure I see a need for a minimum - all 
the factors I'm thinking of (or any factor above 10) would make us 
exceed our current minumum (100) in all cases anyway.

>You probably need to fix the max-connections pass so that it applies the
>same changes to max_fsm_pages as the second pass does --- otherwise, its
>assumption that shared_buffers can really be set that way will be wrong.
>Other than that I didn't see any problem with the shared_buffers part of
>the patch.
>
>
>  
>

OK, will do.

cheers

andrew