Re: Increase default effective_cache_size?

>> Thank you: the problem was the effective_cache_size (which I hadn't
>> changed from the default of 1000). This machine doesn't have loads of
>> RAM, but I knocked it up to 65536 and now the query uses the index,
>> without having to change the statistics.
> 
> Considering recent discussion about how 8.2 is probably noticeably more
> sensitive to effective_cache_size than prior releases, I wonder whether
> it's not time to adopt a larger default value for that setting.  The
> current default of 1000 pages (8Mb) seems really pretty silly for modern
> machines; we could certainly set it to 10 times that without problems,
> and maybe much more.  Thoughts?

I think that 128 megs is probably a reasonable starting point. I know 
plenty of people that run postgresql on 512 megs of ram. If you take 
into account shared buffers and work mem, that seems like a reasonable 
starting point.

Joshua D. Drake
> 
>             regards, tom lane
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
>        subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
>        message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
> 


-- 
   === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240   Providing the most comprehensive  PostgreSQL
solutionssince 1997             http://www.commandprompt.com/