Re: cpu_tuple_cost
От | Greg Sabino Mullane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: cpu_tuple_cost |
Дата | |
Msg-id | def6f62ce9d501044843c654a94832ef@biglumber.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: cpu_tuple_cost (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: cpu_tuple_cost
Re: cpu_tuple_cost Re: cpu_tuple_cost |
Список | pgsql-performance |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 > Reducing random_page_cost is usually the best way to get the > planner to favor indexscans more. On that note, can I raise the idea again of dropping the default value for random_page_cost in postgresql.conf? I think 4 is too conservative in this day and age. Certainly the person who will be negatively impacted by a default drop of 4 to 3 will be the exception and not the rule. - -- Greg Sabino Mullane greg@turnstep.com PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 200503140702 http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iD8DBQFCNX2avJuQZxSWSsgRAk7QAJ4lye7pEcQIWMRV2fs15bHGY2zBbACeJtLC E/vUG/lagjcyWPt9gfngsn0= =CKIq -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: