Re: Feature Request --- was: PostgreSQL Performance Tuning

[Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>]

Bill,

> The only one that seems practical (to me) is random_page_cost.  The
> others are all configuration options that I (as a DBA) want to be able
> to decide for myself. 

Actually, random_page_cost *should* be a constant "4.0" or "3.5", which 
represents the approximate ratio of seek/scan speed which has been 
relatively constant across 6 years of HDD technology.  The only reason we 
make it a configuration variable is that there's defects in our cost model 
which cause users to want to tinker with it.

Mind you, that's gotten better in recent versions as well.  Lately I mostly 
tinker with effective_cache_size and the various cpu_* stats rather than 
modifying random_page_cost.

-- 
--Josh

Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisco