Re: [HACKERS] Changing the default configuration (was Re:

From: "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: "Merlin Moncure" <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com>, "PostgresSQL Hackers Mailing List" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Changing the default configuration (was Re:
Date: 2003-02-12 05:32:41
Message-ID: GNELIHDDFBOCMGBFGEFOCEICCFAA.chriskl@familyhealth.com.au
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance

> >> We could retarget to try to stay under SHMMAX=4M, which I think is
> >> the next boundary that's significant in terms of real-world platforms
> >> (isn't that the default SHMMAX on some BSDen?). That would allow us
> >> 350 or so shared_buffers, which is better, but still not really a
> >> serious choice for production work.
>
> > What is a serious choice for production work?
>
> Well, as I commented later in that mail, I feel that 1000 buffers is
> a reasonable choice --- but I have to admit that I have no hard data
> to back up that feeling. Perhaps we should take this to the
> pgsql-perform list and argue about reasonable choices.

Damn. Another list I have to subscribe to!

The results I just posted indicate that 1000 buffers is really quite bad
performance comaped to 4000, perhaps up to 100 TPS for selects and 30 TPS
for TPC-B.

Still, that 1000 is in itself vastly better than 64!!

Chris

In response to

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Christopher Kings-Lynne 2003-02-12 05:33:52 Re: [HACKERS] Changing the default configuration (was Re:
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-02-12 05:27:31 Re: [HACKERS] Changing the default configuration (was Re:

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Christopher Kings-Lynne 2003-02-12 05:33:52 Re: [HACKERS] Changing the default configuration (was Re:
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-02-12 05:27:31 Re: [HACKERS] Changing the default configuration (was Re:

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Christopher Kings-Lynne 2003-02-12 05:33:52 Re: [HACKERS] Changing the default configuration (was Re:
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-02-12 05:27:31 Re: [HACKERS] Changing the default configuration (was Re: