Re: Auto-tuning work_mem and maintenance_work_mem

On Oct 11, 2013 10:23 PM, "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On 10/11/2013 01:11 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > In summary, I think we need to:
> >
> > * decide on new defaults for work_mem and maintenance_work_mem
> > * add an initdb flag to allow users/packagers to set shared_bufffers?
> > * add an autovacuum_work_mem setting?
> > * change the default for temp_buffers?
>
> If we're changing defaults, bgwriter_lru_maxpages and vacuum_cost_limit
> could also use a bump; those thresholds were set for servers with < 1GB
> of RAM

Uh, those are there to limit io and not memory, right? More memory isn't
the reason to increase them, more io is. For people deploying on modern
server hardware then yes it's often low, but for all those deploying in
virtualized environments with io performance reminding you of the 1990ies,
I'm not so sure it is...

/Magnus