Re: [HACKERS] Vacuum: allow usage of more than 1GB of work mem

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
To: Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Anastasia Lubennikova <a(dot)lubennikova(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Anastasia Lubennikova <lubennikovaav(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-Dev <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Vacuum: allow usage of more than 1GB of work mem
Date: 2018-01-25 14:41:38
Message-ID: 20180125144138.otxjbrotnof3n6q5@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Claudio Freire wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 4:11 AM, Thomas Munro
> <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:

> > *** 128,134 ****
> > SELECT pg_relation_size('vactst', 'main');
> > pg_relation_size
> > ------------------
> > ! 0
> > (1 row)
> >
> > SELECT count(*) FROM vactst;
> > --- 128,134 ----
> > SELECT pg_relation_size('vactst', 'main');
> > pg_relation_size
> > ------------------
> > ! 8192
> > (1 row)

> However, shouldn't an empty relation have an initial page anyway? In
> that case shouldn't the correct value be 8192?

No, it's legal for an empty table to have size 0 on disk.

--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2018-01-25 15:01:19 Re: reducing isolation tests runtime
Previous Message Tom Lane 2018-01-25 14:40:10 Re: [PATCH][PROPOSAL] Refuse setting toast.* reloptions when TOAST table does not exist