On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 03:30:35PM -0300, Arthur Silva wrote: > > Every GUC add complexity to the system because people have to understand > > it to know if they should tune it. No GUC is zero-cost. > > Please see my blog post about the cost of adding GUCs: > > http://momjian.us/main/blogs/pgblog/2009.html#January_10_2009 > > That's true Bruce (nice post, it was a good reading). > But how can we ignore 25%+ improvements (from 8 to 24)? > At very least we should delivery some pretty good defaults.
Well, checkpoint_segments was a similar case where we couldn't give good tuning advice so we went with a server log file warning if it needed to be increased --- this might be a similar case. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
