←back to thread

Self-Hosting like it's 2025

(kiranet.org)
221 points finnlab | 3 comments | 01 Apr 25 10:11 UTC | HN request time: 0.603s | source
Show context
hankchinaski ◴[01 Apr 25 11:18 UTC] No.43545422[source]▶
The only thing that holds me back for self hosting is Postgres. Has anyone managed to get a rock solid Postgres setup self managed? Backups + tuning?
replies(8): >>43545468 #>>43545490 #>>43545510 #>>43545550 #>>43545777 #>>43545820 #>>43546275 #>>43547434 #
1. Aachen ◴[01 Apr 25 12:09 UTC] No.43545777[source]▶
Why would tuning be necessary for a regular setup, does it come with such bad defaults? Why not upstream those tunes so it can work out of the box?

I remember spending time on this as a teenager but I haven't touched my MariaDB config in a decade now probably. Ah no, one time a few years ago I turned off fsyncing temporarily to do a huge batch of insertions (helped a lot with qps, especially on the HDD I used at the time), but that's not something to leave permanently enabled so not really tuning it for production use

replies(1): >>43547250 #
2. zrail ◴[01 Apr 25 14:32 UTC] No.43547250[source]▶
PostgreSQL defaults (last I looked, it's been a few years) are/were set up for spinning storage and very little memory. They absolutely work for tiny things like what self-hosting usually implies, but for production workloads tuning the db parameters to match your hardware is essential.
replies(1): >>43547339 #
3. nijave ◴[01 Apr 25 14:41 UTC] No.43547339[source]▶
Correct, they're designed for maximum compatibility. Postgres doesn't even do basic adjustments out of the box and defaults are designed to work on tiny machines.

Iirc default shared_mem is 128MB and it's usually recommended to set to 50-75% system RAM.