| From: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: GUC variable for setting number of local buffers |
| Date: | 2005-03-19 20:19:14 |
| Message-ID: | 20050319161850.X954@ganymede.hub.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, 19 Mar 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
> That means we can go ahead with providing a GUC variable to make the
> array size user-selectable. I was thinking of calling it either
> "local_buffers" (in contrast to "shared_buffers") or "temp_buffers" (to
> emphasize the fact that they're used for temporary tables). Anyone have
> a preference, or a better alternative?
temp_buffers sounds more descriptive ...
----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-03-19 20:23:59 | Re: Very strange query difference between 7.3.6 and 7.4.6 (7.3.6 kicking 7.4.6 butt) |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-03-19 19:51:15 | Re: Very strange query difference between 7.3.6 and 7.4.6 (7.3.6 kicking 7.4.6 butt) |