Re: Increase default effective_cache_size?

>> Thank you: the problem was the effective_cache_size (which I hadn't
>> changed from the default of 1000). This machine doesn't have loads of
>> RAM, but I knocked it up to 65536 and now the query uses the index,
>> without having to change the statistics.
>
> Considering recent discussion about how 8.2 is probably noticeably more
> sensitive to effective_cache_size than prior releases, I wonder whether
> it's not time to adopt a larger default value for that setting. The
> current default of 1000 pages (8Mb) seems really pretty silly for modern
> machines; we could certainly set it to 10 times that without problems,
> and maybe much more. Thoughts?

I think that 128 megs is probably a reasonable starting point. I know
plenty of people that run postgresql on 512 megs of ram. If you take
into account shared buffers and work mem, that seems like a reasonable
starting point.

Joshua D. Drake
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>

--

=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/