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
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: Jim C. Nasby||Date: 2007-05-12 21:19:48|
|Subject: Performance monitoring (was: [PATCHES] Logging checkpoints and other slowdown causes)|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2007-05-12 19:45:32|
|Subject: Re: Have vacuum emit a warning when it runs out of maintenance_work_mem |