From: amul sul [mailto:sula...@gmail.com] > IMHO, I think we could remove third paragraph completely and generalised > starting of second paragraph, somewhat looks likes as > follow: > > <para> > - If you have a dedicated database server with 1GB or more of RAM, > a > - reasonable starting value for <varname>shared_buffers</varname> > is 25% > - of the memory in your system. There are some workloads where even > + A reasonable starting value for > <varname>shared_buffers</varname> is 25% > + of the RAM in your system. There are some workloads where even > large settings for <varname>shared_buffers</varname> are > effective, but > because <productname>PostgreSQL</productname> also relies on the > operating system cache, it is unlikely that an allocation of more > than
The third paragraph may be redundant, I'm a bit inclined to leave it for kindness and completeness. The attached revised patch just correct the existing typo (large -> larger). I'll change the status to needs review. Regards Takayuki Tsunakawa
win_shrdbuf_perf_v2.patch
Description: win_shrdbuf_perf_v2.patch
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
