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

Re: Have vacuum emit a warning when it runs out of maintenance_work_mem

From: "Guillaume Smet" <guillaume(dot)smet(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Jim Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Have vacuum emit a warning when it runs out of maintenance_work_mem
Date: 2007-05-09 23:41:28
Message-ID: 1d4e0c10705091641m268af4abpe78e1c6da034bd49@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches
On 5/9/07, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Jim Nasby <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org> writes:
> > Any time this happens it's generally a nasty surprise for users.
>
> Really?  Running out of work memory is expected on large tables.

Sure. Perhaps we should find a better error message but it's an
interesting information. Personnaly, I try to choose a sane value
depending on my database but I'm never sure it's really sufficient or
if I added 100MB it would have made a real difference.

> > It would be nice to throw them an explicit warning that it's occurring.
>
> I think this is a bad idea.  It's furthermore pretty useless in the
> autovacuum world, since no one is likely to see the warning.

IMHO we're far from having everyone using autovacuum. For instance,
for most of our customers, we prefer having a window for vacuuming
(from 3am for example) instead of having autovacuum fired in the
middle of the day during a load peak.
If we can shorten the window by having a sufficient value for
maintenance_work_mem, it's even nicer and Jim's patch could help us
with this point.

--
Guillaume

In response to

Responses

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Tomas DoranDate: 2007-05-10 01:59:56
Subject: Re: Implemented current_query
Previous:From: Jim NasbyDate: 2007-05-09 23:18:55
Subject: Re: Have vacuum emit a warning when it runs out of maintenance_work_mem

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