On 2014-05-07 10:07:07 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > In the meantime, it seems like there is an emerging consensus that nobody > much likes the existing auto-tuning behavior for effective_cache_size, > and that we should revert that in favor of just increasing the fixed > default value significantly. I see no problem with a value of say 4GB; > that's very unlikely to be worse than the pre-9.4 default (128MB) on any > modern machine. > > Votes for or against?
+1 for increasing it to 4GB and remove the autotuning. I don't like the current integration into guc.c much and a new static default doesn't seem to be worse than the current autotuning. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
