On 11/17/16 12:30 AM, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote: > No, I'm not recommending a higher value, but just removing the doubtful > sentences of 512MB upper limit. The advantage is that eliminating this > sentence will make a chance for users to try best setting.
I think this is a good point. The information is clearly wrong/outdated. We have no new better information, but we should remove misleading outdated advice and let users find new advice. Basically, this just puts Windows on par with other platforms with regard to shared_buffers tuning, doesn't it? I'm inclined to commit the original patch if there are no objections. -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers