On 12 Feb 2004, Greg Stark wrote:
> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>
> > > Hmmm ... maybe query_work_mem and maintenance_work_mem, or something
> > > similar?
> >
> > I'll go with these unless someone has another proposal ...
>
> dml_sort_mem and ddl_sort_mem ?
I like those. Are they an accurte representation of what's going on? If
so, I'd go with these, as they are more easily recognizable by folks
who've worked with dbs for a while. On the other hand, they're probably
less recognizable to the newbies.