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

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

From: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>,pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org,Guillaume Smet <guillaume(dot)smet(at)gmail(dot)com>,Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: Have vacuum emit a warning when it runs out of maintenance_work_mem
Date: 2007-05-12 21:03:53
Message-ID: 20070512210353.GL52939@nasby.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches
On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 07:57:44PM +0100, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Or we could switch to a more compact representation of the dead tuples, 
> and not need such a big maintenance_work_mem in the first place.

Sure, but even with a more compact representation you can still run out
of maintenance_work_mem... unless we allow this to spill to disk. At
first guess that sounds insane, but if you've got a large enough set of
indexes it *might* actually be faster.

Either way, as long as maintenance_work_mem is an issue I think we need
a way to warn users.
-- 
Jim Nasby                                            jim(at)nasby(dot)net
EnterpriseDB      http://enterprisedb.com      512.569.9461 (cell)

In response to

Responses

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Jim C. NasbyDate: 2007-05-12 21:19:48
Subject: Performance monitoring (was: [PATCHES] Logging checkpoints and other slowdown causes)
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2007-05-12 19:45:32
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