On Wed, 2008-12-03 at 15:21 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > >> I'm not sure what "mixed" mode is supposed to be, but based on what > >> I've seen so far, I'm a skeptical of the idea that encouraging people > >> to raise default_statistics_target to 50 and turn on > >> constraint_exclusion is reasonable. > > > > Why? > > Because both of those settings are strictly worse for my database than
I can see an argument about constraint_exclusion but default_statistics_target I don't. > the defaults. I don't have any partitioned tables, and see: > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-11/msg01837.php > > > > What does checkpoint_segments have to do with the size of the database? > > It seems unlikely that you would want 256 MB of checkpoint segments on > a database that is only 100 MB (or even 500 MB). But you might very > well want that on a database that is 1 TB. It also seems unlikely that you would hit 256MB of checkpoint segments on a 100MB database before checkpoint_timeout and if you did, you certainly did need them. Remember postgresql only creates the segments when it needs them. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake > > ...Robert > -- PostgreSQL Consulting, Development, Support, Training 503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997 -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
