From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org > [mailto:pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Magnus Hagander Okay and I think partially it might be because we don't have > writeback > optimization (done in 9.6) for Windows. However, still the broader > question stands that whether above data is sufficient to say that > we > can recommend the settings of shared_buffers on Windows similar > to > Linux? > > > > > Based on this optimization we might want to keep the text that says large > shared buffers on Windows aren't as effective perhaps, and just remove the > sentence that explicitly says don't go over 512MB?
Just removing the reference to the size would make users ask a question "What size is the effective upper limit?" Regards Takayuki Tsunakawa -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
