Re: Posix Shared Mem patch
От | Jeff Janes |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Posix Shared Mem patch |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAMkU=1xcZ=162SWKHnA3_k+rRz9aqX2mD-sF8XaRMKVDK854fA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Posix Shared Mem patch (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 8:26 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > 3. Consider adjusting the logic inside initdb. If this works > everywhere, the code for determining how to set shared_buffers should > become pretty much irrelevant. Even if it only works some places, we > could add 64MB or 128MB or whatever to the list of values we probe, so > that people won't get quite such a sucky configuration out of the box. > Of course there's no number here that will be good for everyone. This seems independent of the type of shared memory used and the limits on it. If it tried and 64MB or 128MB and discovered that it couldn't obtain that much shared memory, it automatically climbs down to smaller values until it finds one that works. I think the impediment to adopting larger defaults is not what happens if it can't get that much shared memory, but rather what happens if the machine doesn't have that much physical memory. The test server will still start (and so there will be no climb-down), leaving a default which is valid but just has horrid performance. Cheers, Jeff
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: