On 05/07/2014 10:12 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
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.
+1. If we ever want to implement an auto-tuning heuristic it seems we're
going to need some hard empirical evidence to support it, and that
doesn't seem likely to appear any time soon.
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
