Amit Gupta <amit(dot)pc(dot)gupta(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Upon taking a cursory look at the cost functions of other operators, I
> realized that available memory (effective_cache_size) is not
> considered for estimating the costs of hash/sort/NLjoin/etc. Why is
> that the case?
The relevant number for those is work_mem not effective_cache_size.
regards, tom lane