Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: IN question

From: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: Steve Atkins <steve(at)blighty(dot)com>, SF PostgreSQL <sfpug(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: IN question
Date: 2008-12-10 23:39:33
Message-ID: 1228952373.2754.62.camel@dell.linuxdev.us.dell.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: sfpug
On Wed, 2008-12-10 at 13:41 -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Steve,
> 
> > I'm not so sure there's such a thing as a limit that's too big. 
> 
> Sure there is.  out-of-memory error.
> 
> Actually, I'd like to see the limit set at work_mem.

You mean that it should share work_mem, or be an additional work_mem
bytes?

I think sharing is probably bad, because then passing a query near the
limit would basically mean that you have no working memory at all (the
query must be parsed/analyzed before other uses of work_mem, of course).
Maybe that's tolerable, I suppose.

And if it's additional memory, it should probably be a different GUC.

If there is an explicit limit, which sounds reasonable, I think it's
good to separate parsing limits from executor limits.

Regards,
	Jeff Davis


In response to

Responses

sfpug by date

Next:From: Jeff DavisDate: 2008-12-10 23:44:45
Subject: Re: IN question
Previous:From: Meredith L. PattersonDate: 2008-12-10 22:34:02
Subject: Re: IN question

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group