Fri, 14 Nov 2014 17:06:54 +0000 от Shaun Thomas <stho...@optionshouse.com>:
> Alexey,
>
> The issue is not that 8GB is the maximum. You *can* set it higher. What I'm
> saying, and I'm not alone in this, is that setting it higher can actually
> decrease performance for various reasons. Setting it to 25% of memory on a
> system with 512GB of RAM for instance, would be tantamount to disaster. A
> checkpoint with a setting that high could overwhelm pretty much any disk
> controller and end up completely ruining DB performance. And that's just
> *one* of the drawbacks.
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________
>
> See http://www.peak6.com/email_disclaimer/ for terms and conditions related
> to this email
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
>
Ok. Just need to know what think another developers about this - should pgtune
care about this case? Because I am not sure, what users with 512GB will use
pgtune.
--
Alexey Vasiliev
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
