Re: Idea about better configuration options for sort memory

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> writes:
> >>> Hmmm ... maybe query_work_mem and maintenance_work_mem, or something
> >>> similar?
> >>
> >> I'll go with these unless someone has another proposal ...
>
> > The only confusion is that you can use multiple query_work_mem per
> > query, but I can't think of a better name.
>
> True. Maybe just "work_mem" and "maintenance_work_mem"?
>
> BTW, I am going to look at whether GUC can be persuaded to continue to
> allow "sort_mem" as an alternate name, if we rename it. That would
> alleviate most of the backward-compatibility issues of changing such
> a well-known parameter name.

Good. It is not like we have a huge namespace limitation in there. I
wonder if we could cost it as a list of string pointers, null
terminated.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073