| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: installcheck failing on psql_crosstab |
| Date: | 2016-06-07 23:21:23 |
| Message-ID: | 20160607232123.GA518273@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 12:31 PM, Michael Paquier
> > <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 12:28 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> >> <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> >>> Hmm, so we could solve the complaint by adding an ANALYZE. I'm open to
> >>> that; other opinions?
>
> >> We could just enforce work_mem to 64kB and then reset it.
>
> > Or just set up work_mem to a wanted value for the duration of the run
> > of psql_crosstab. Attached is my proposal.
>
> I liked the ANALYZE idea better; this seems pretty ad-hoc.
Done that way.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-06-07 23:48:58 | Re: installcheck failing on psql_crosstab |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-06-07 22:59:52 | Re: COMMENT ON, psql and access methods |