Re: Remove the comment on the countereffectiveness of large shared_buffers on Windows

On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 3:23 PM, Peter Eisentraut
<peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 11/17/16 12:30 AM, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote:
>> No, I'm not recommending a higher value, but just removing the doubtful sentences of 512MB upper limit.  The
advantageis that eliminating this sentence will make a chance for users to try best setting.
 
>
> I think this is a good point.  The information is clearly
> wrong/outdated.  We have no new better information, but we should remove
> misleading outdated advice and let users find new advice.  Basically,
> this just puts Windows on par with other platforms with regard to
> shared_buffers tuning, doesn't it?
>
> I'm inclined to commit the original patch if there are no objections.

+1.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company