Hash: SHA1

Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>>> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>>> Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>>>>> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>>>>>   o  Automatic adjustment of bgwriter_lru_maxpages 
>>> I would expect a fairly static benchmark workload to benefit from having
>>> a bgwriter, more so than more unpredictable real world applications.
>> Hmmm, I find that real world applications are quite predictable over
>> time. Certainly you have spikes (good pr, whatever) but in general with
>> a little bit of monitoring it is quite possible to evaluate a generally
>> expected result.
>> I guess my point is, if the patch looks good and does not appear to hurt
>> anything, why not apply it? At least that way we can start to review the
>> progress of the feature itself as it starts to see use.
> If it doesn't appear to have any positive effect, why would we apply it?

We don't know if it has a positive effect. My understanding is that your
testing shows that it does not appear to have a negative effect. Those
are different things don't you think?

> If we apply the patch, how would you monitor it's effectiveness in a
> live database? There's nothing to compare against.

Well that's valid. A production database you really don't want to be
fiddling. *shrug*

I hate to see potential lost, but if it isn't a good fit....


Joshua D. Drake

- --

      === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564   24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL solutions since 1997  http://www.commandprompt.com/
                        UNIQUE NOT NULL
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/

Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at


Reply via email to