On Tue, 3 Jun 2008, Paul van den Bogaard wrote:
So overhauling the GUC parameters is one step, but adding proper instrumentation in order to really measure the impact of the new setting is necessary too.
Correct, but completely off-topic regardless. One problem to be solved here is to take PostgreSQL tuning from zero to, say, 50% automatic. Wander the user lists for a few months; the number of completely misconfigured systems out there is considerable, partly because the default values for many parameters are completely unreasonable for modern hardware and there's no easy way to improve on that without someone educating themselves. Getting distracted by the requirements of the high-end systems will give you a problem you have no hope of executing in a reasonable time period.
By all means bring that up as a separate (and much, much larger) project: "Database Benchmarking and Sensitivity Analysis of Performance Tuning Parameters" would make a nice PhD project for somebody, and there's probably a good patent in there somewhere. Even if you had such a tool, it wouldn't be usable by non-experts unless the mundate GUC generation issues are dealt with first, and that's where this is at right now.
-- * Greg Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
