Re: proposal: Set effective_cache_size to greater of .conf value, shared_buffers

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: proposal: Set effective_cache_size to greater of .conf value, shared_buffers
Date: 2014-05-07 18:58:02
Message-ID: CAM3SWZRAc9YOo6zJ6Cv0180GMX7UcFbWz4F_oJT9=SCP6pSBDg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> But that does not mean, as the phrase "folk
> wisdom" might be taken to imply, that we don't know anything at all
> about what actually works well in practice.

Folk wisdom doesn't imply that. It implies that we think this works,
and we may well be right, but there isn't all that much rigor behind
some of it. I'm not blaming anyone for this state of affairs. I've
heard plenty of people repeat the "don't exceed 8GB" rule - I
regularly repeated it myself. I cannot find any rigorous defense of
this, though. If you're aware of one, please point it out to me.

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Petr Jelinek 2014-05-07 19:00:37 Re: making bgworkers without shmem access actually not have shmem access
Previous Message Robert Haas 2014-05-07 18:57:20 Re: making bgworkers without shmem access actually not have shmem access