From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: regex cache |
Date: | 2008-06-18 21:54:00 |
Message-ID: | 485983F8.8010500@agliodbs.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
>>> Having said that, I'm not sure it'd help your problem. If your query is
>>> using more than 32 regexes concurrently, it likely is using $BIGNUM
>>> regexes concurrently. How do we fix that?
>
>> Hmmm. I think there's a lot of ground between 32 and $BIGNUM. For example,
>> where I'm hitting a wall is 300 regexes. Some quick testing on my opteron
>> text machine right now shows that the execution time difference between 20rx
>> and 50rx is around 20x.
>
> Hmm. Well, I still don't want to tie it to work_mem; how do you feel
> about a new GUC to determine the max number of cached REs?
Yeah. You know me, I was just trying to avoid having more GUCs.
--Josh
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-06-18 22:08:47 | Re: regex cache |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-06-18 21:50:54 | Re: regex cache |