Re: Vacuum: allow usage of more than 1GB of work mem - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: Vacuum: allow usage of more than 1GB of work mem
Date
Msg-id CA+Tgmobjqu4ocSfkMTF+S4Xn4dx1tBxbNrXzPjhKiFPMN1t4ug@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Vacuum: allow usage of more than 1GB of work mem  (Pavan Deolasee <pavan.deolasee@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Pavan Deolasee
<pavan.deolasee@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 7:03 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 11:39 PM, Pavan Deolasee
>> <pavan.deolasee@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > But I actually wonder if we are over engineering things and
>> > overestimating
>> > cost of memmove etc. How about this simpler approach:
>>
>> Don't forget that you need to handle the case where
>> maintenance_work_mem is quite small.
>
> How small? The default IIRC these days is 64MB and minimum is 1MB. I think
> we can do some special casing for very small values and ensure that things
> at the very least work and hopefully don't regress for them.

Sounds like you need to handle values as small as 1MB, then.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Sachin Kotwal
Date:
Subject: Re: Why postgres take RowExclusiveLock on all partition
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Aggregate Push Down - Performing aggregation on foreign server