| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alex Hunsaker <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kenneth Marshall <ktm(at)rice(dot)edu>, Xiao Meng <mx(dot)cogito(at)gmail(dot)com>, Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)sun(dot)com>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: hash index improving v3 |
| Date: | 2008-09-23 12:16:34 |
| Message-ID: | 25193.1222172194@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> maintenance_work_mem is already used for 3 separate operations that bear
> little resemblance to each other. If it's appropriate for all of those
> then its appropriate for this usage also.
No, it isn't.
The fundamental point here is that this isn't a memory allocation
parameter; it's a switchover threshold between two different behaviors.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2008-09-23 12:23:43 | Re: Proposed patch: make SQL interval-literal syntax work per spec |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-09-23 12:14:58 | Re: pg_type.h regression? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2008-09-23 13:05:15 | Re: hash index improving v3 |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2008-09-23 05:15:36 | Re: hash index improving v3 |