On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 12:16:30PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 06:02:41AM +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote: > > > Storage that has a low random read cost relative to sequential, e.g. > > solid-state drives, might also be better modeled with a value that is > > close > > to 1 for random_page_cost. > > > > > > I depends on estimation. Lot of people use random_page_cost as fix of broken > > estimation. Then configures this value to some strange values. Lot of other > > queries with good estimation can be worse then. > > I have been recommending 1.1 as a value for random_page_cost for SSDs > for years, and I think it would be helpful to suggest that value, so doc > patch attached.
Patch applied back through 9.5. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> https://momjian.us EnterpriseDB https://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription +
