| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Auto-tuning work_mem and maintenance_work_mem |
| Date: | 2014-02-17 20:10:12 |
| Message-ID: | CAM3SWZT+v1GDkF2CHjZmWUS7ugtyFS3oWKm1nGkgmJg61__+OA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 8:31 AM, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
>> Actually, I object to increasing work_mem by default. In my experience
>> most of the untuned servers are backing some kind of web application and
>> often run with far too many connections. Increasing work_mem for those
>> is dangerous.
>
> And I still disagree with this- even in those cases. Those same untuned
> servers are running dirt-simple queries 90% of the time and they won't
> use any more memory from this, while the 10% of the queries which are
> more complicated will greatly improve.
+1
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2014-02-17 20:16:21 | Re: GiST support for inet datatypes |
| Previous Message | Emre Hasegeli | 2014-02-17 19:57:42 | Re: GiST support for inet datatypes |