Re: Idea about better configuration options for sort memory

From: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: Idea about better configuration options for sort memory
Date: 2004-01-31 23:01:00
Message-ID: 401C33AC.4020606@joeconway.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> Now, what should we call it instead? I haven't come up with any
> compelling thoughts --- the best I can do is "big_sort_mem" or
> "single_sort_mem". Surely someone out there has a better idea.
>
> BTW, does anyone want to lobby for renaming sort_mem at the same time?
> Since it's used for sizing hash tables as well as sort workspace, it's
> rather misnamed. I hesitate to rename it because of the potential for
> confusion though. People are pretty used to the existing name.

Hmmm ... maybe query_work_mem and maintenance_work_mem, or something
similar?

Joe

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marc G. Fournier 2004-01-31 23:05:32 Re: Idea about better configuration options for sort memory
Previous Message Thomas Hallgren 2004-01-31 22:51:31 Re: Transaction callback