Re: proposal: Set effective_cache_size to greater of .conf value, shared_buffers
От | Claudio Freire |
---|---|
Тема | Re: proposal: Set effective_cache_size to greater of .conf value, shared_buffers |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAGTBQpZN56Unfs4wGiSkTyae0K9QXfqyjYsjazrX=ZoMp1OpMQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | proposal: Set effective_cache_size to greater of .conf value, shared_buffers (Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: proposal: Set effective_cache_size to greater of .conf
value, shared_buffers
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com> wrote: > Reference: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Simple-join-doesn-t-use-index-td5738689.html > > This is a pretty common gotcha: user sets shared_buffers but misses > the esoteric but important effective_cache_size. ISTM > effective_cache_size should always be >= shared buffers -- this is a > soft configuration error that could be reported as a warning and > perhaps overridden on the fly. Not true. If there are many concurrent users running concurrent queries against parallel databases, such as some test systems I have that contain many databases for many test environments, such a setting wouldn't make sense. If a DBA sets it to lower than shared_buffers, that setting has to be honored. Rather, I'd propose the default setting should be "-1" or something "default" and "automagic" that works most of the time (but not all).
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: