3 ms·
The suggestions pgtune makes are really bad. It sets max_wal_size way too low, max_parallel_workers_per_gather to ridiculously high values, shared_buffers way t
by anarazel 7y ago
The suggestions pgtune makes are really bad. It sets max_wal_size way too low, max_parallel_workers_per_gather to ridiculously high values, shared_buffers way too low, the work_mem settings make no sense whatsoever.
- krn 7y agoCould you recommend any other tool that would generate more sensible PostgreSQL configuration values given similar input? In other words: here is my PostgreSQL version, use case, OS, number of CPUs, available memory size, and storage type. What's the most optimal configuration?
- ahachete 7y agoAs I mentioned upthread (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22224019 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22224019) and in the other thread (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22140773 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22140773), it's not that easy. And simple rules to compute parameters may lead to worse performance than the defaults. Otherwise, they would be the defaults ;)
- johnx123-up 7y agoFYI https://github.com/le0pard/pgtune/issues/35 https://github.com/le0pard/pgtune/issues/35
- anarazel 7y agoHeh, that's a bit awkward... Anyway, went into some details about why they are bad.