On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 12:43:07PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Bruce Momjian escribió: > > > > So, are you saying you like 4x now? > > > > Here is an arugment for 3x. First, using the documented 25% of RAM, 3x > > puts our effective_cache_size as 75% of RAM, giving us no room for > > kernel, backend memory, and work_mem usage. If anything it should be > > lower than 3x, not higher. > > The other argument I see for the 3x value is that it is a compromise. > People with really large servers will want to increase it; people with > very small servers will want to reduce it.
Yes, you could make the argument that 2x is the right default, especially considering work_mem. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
