Re: Query Performance SQL Server vs. Postgresql

From: tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz
To: "Samuel Gendler" <sgendler(at)ideasculptor(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Query Performance SQL Server vs. Postgresql
Date: 2010-11-22 12:22:43
Message-ID: fe8b9f344e9575056f79658e6c639d4d.squirrel@sq.gransy.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

> I believe you can set work_mem to a different value just for the duration
> of
> a single query, so you needn't have work_mem set so high if for every
> query
> on the system. A single query may well use a multiple of work_mem, so you
> really probably don't want it that high all the time unless all of your
> queries are structured similarly. Just set work_mem='2047MB'; query;
> reset
> all;

Yes, executing "set work_mem='64MB'" right before the query should be just
fine. Setting work_mem to 2GB is an overkill most of the time (99.99999%).

Tomas

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kevin Grittner 2010-11-22 15:11:15 Re: Slow SELECT on small table
Previous Message Samuel Gendler 2010-11-22 11:02:37 Re: Query Performance SQL Server vs. Postgresql