pgbench create index anomoly - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

While setting up for the compressed sort testing...

NOTICE:  ALTER TABLE / ADD PRIMARY KEY will create implicit index "accounts_pkey" for table "accounts"
LOG:  begin index sort: unique = t, workMem = 16384, randomAccess = f
LOG:  begin index sort: unique = t, workMem = 16384, randomAccess = f
LOG:  begin index sort: unique = f, workMem = 1024, randomAccess = f
LOG:  begin index sort: unique = f, workMem = 1024, randomAccess = f
LOG:  switching to external sort with 59 tapes: CPU 0.11s/0.16u sec elapsed 3.80 sec
LOG:  switching to external sort with 59 tapes: CPU 0.11s/0.16u sec elapsed 3.80 sec
LOG:  internal sort ended, 25 KB used: CPU 160.53s/881.21u sec elapsed 4418.76 sec
LOG:  internal sort ended, 25 KB used: CPU 160.53s/881.21u sec elapsed 4418.76 sec
LOG:  performsort starting: CPU 160.53s/881.21u sec elapsed 4418.76 sec
LOG:  performsort starting: CPU 160.53s/881.21u sec elapsed 4418.76 sec
LOG:  finished writing final run 1 to tape 0: CPU 160.53s/881.79u sec elapsed 4419.35 sec
LOG:  finished writing final run 1 to tape 0: CPU 160.53s/881.79u sec elapsed 4419.35 sec
LOG:  performsort done: CPU 160.53s/881.79u sec elapsed 4419.41 sec
LOG:  performsort done: CPU 160.53s/881.79u sec elapsed 4419.41 sec
LOG:  external sort ended, 135814 disk blocks used: CPU 175.95s/1067.13u sec elapsed 4796.85 sec
LOG:  external sort ended, 135814 disk blocks used: CPU 175.95s/1067.13u sec elapsed 4796.85 sec

What's with the second workMem setting?

bench=# show work_mem;1024

bench=# show maintenance_work_mem ;16384

From one of the other sorts:
NOTICE:  ALTER TABLE / ADD PRIMARY KEY will create implicit index "tellers_pkey" for table "tell
ers"
LOG:  begin index sort: unique = t, workMem = 16384, randomAccess = f
LOG:  begin index sort: unique = t, workMem = 16384, randomAccess = f
LOG:  begin index sort: unique = f, workMem = 1024, randomAccess = f
LOG:  begin index sort: unique = f, workMem = 1024, randomAccess = f
LOG:  internal sort ended, 25 KB used: CPU 0.00s/0.01u sec elapsed 0.13 sec
LOG:  internal sort ended, 25 KB used: CPU 0.00s/0.01u sec elapsed 0.13 sec
LOG:  performsort starting: CPU 0.00s/0.01u sec elapsed 0.13 sec
LOG:  performsort starting: CPU 0.00s/0.01u sec elapsed 0.13 sec
LOG:  performsort done: CPU 0.00s/0.01u sec elapsed 0.13 sec
LOG:  performsort done: CPU 0.00s/0.01u sec elapsed 0.13 sec
LOG:  internal sort ended, 1706 KB used: CPU 0.01s/0.01u sec elapsed 0.16 sec
LOG:  internal sort ended, 1706 KB used: CPU 0.01s/0.01u sec elapsed 0.16 sec

Since that used 1.7M, it seems that it wasn't using the 1024 limit (unless that
code's broken). I'm just wondering where that other log message came from (note
also that it's indicating a non-unique sort).
-- 
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant      jnasby@pervasive.com
Pervasive Software      http://pervasive.com    work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf       cell: 512-569-9461