Re: A smaller default postgresql.conf
Jaime Casanova <jcasanov@systemguards.com.ec>
From: "Jaime Casanova" <jcasanov@systemguards.com.ec>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: "Robert Treat" <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>,
pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e@gmx.net>, "Joshua Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>, "Magnus Hagander" <magnus@hagander.net>, "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre@commandprompt.com>, "Hans-Juergen Schoenig" <postgres@cybertec.at>
Date: 2008-08-20T06:22:26Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 9:40 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net> writes: >> I'd still like to see us adopt the proposal from some time ago where >> we stop commenting out the parameters at all, but short of that, >> hiding options seems about the worst choice we could make. > > Well, there seems to be a very substantial body of opinion that says > we *do* need to hide "uninteresting" options. > more to the point... not just "uninteresting" but "dangerous for the uninformed" ones... i have seen to many people turning off fsync in OLTP systems 'cause someone tolds them that will improve speed... and work_mem setted at 256Mb because that improves a bad query that should be rewritten as something more sanely... -- regards, Jaime Casanova Soporte y capacitación de PostgreSQL Asesoría y desarrollo de sistemas Guayaquil - Ecuador Cel. (593) 87171157