On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 11:05:18PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > "Jonah H. Harris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > While the student could do some benchmarking on relatively new > > hardware and make suggestions, I agree with Tom. Having to keep > > support for older platforms doesn't leave much flexibility to change > > the defaults. > > Another point here is that the defaults *are* reasonable for development > and for small installations; the people who are complaining are the ones > who expect to run terabyte databases without any tuning. (I exaggerate > perhaps, but the point is valid.) > > We've talked more than once about offering multiple alternative > starting-point postgresql.conf files to give people an idea of what to > do for small/medium/large installations. MySQL have done that for years > and it doesn't seem that users are unable to cope with the concept. > But doing this is (a) mostly a matter of testing and documenting, not > coding and (b) probably too small for a SoC project anyway.
My recollection was that there was opposition to offering multiple config files, but that there was a proposal to make initdb smarter about picking configuration values. Personally, I agree that multiple config files would be fine. Or a really fancy solution would be feeding a config option to initdb and have it generate an appropriate postgresql.conf. -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
