Re: [PATCHES] default resource limits

[Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>]

Robert Treat wrote:

> Maybe we should write something in to check if apache is installed if we're so 
> concerned about that usage... 

Er, yeah, I'll get right on that. (Don't hold your breath.)

> I already know that I set the connection limits 
> lower on most of the installations I do (given than most installations are 
> not production webservers).  

So do I. In fact, even on production web servers I usually use 
connection pooling and can rarely get an app to approach saturating a 
pool size of around 20 let alone 100. But then you and I know something 
about tuning Postgres.  What I am aiming for is something that is closer 
to the norm on out of the box configuration.

> There is also the argument to be made that just 
> because systems these days have more memory doesn't mean we have to use it. 
>
>  

Just because we can run with very little memory doesn't mean we have to. 
What is the point of having lots of memory if you don't use it? We are 
talking defaults here. initdb will still scale down on resource-starved 
machines.

cheers

andrew