Tom, > If we could do that on *all* platforms, I might be for it, but we only > know how to get that number on some platforms.
I don't see what's wrong with using it where we can get it, and not using it where we can't. > There's also the issue > of whether we really want to assume that the machine is dedicated to > Postgres, which IMO is an implicit assumption of any default that scales > itself to physical RAM. 10% isn't assuming dedicated. Assuming dedicated would be 20% or 25%. I was thinking "10%, with a ceiling of 512MB". > For the moment I think we should just allow initdb to scale up a little > bit more than where it is now, perhaps 128MB instead of 32. I wouldn't be opposed to that. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://pgexperts.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers