Re: [HACKERS] qsort again (was Re: Strange Create Index behaviour)

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: gpd(at)gpdnet(dot)co(dot)uk
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] qsort again (was Re: Strange Create Index behaviour)
Date: 2006-02-16 14:42:40
Message-ID: 27898.1140100960@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance

"Gary Doades" <gpd(at)gpdnet(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
> I think the reason I wasn't seeing performance issues with normal sort
> operations is because they use work_mem not maintenance_work_mem which was
> only set to 2048 anyway. Does that sound right?

Very probable. Do you want to test the theory by jacking that up? ;-)

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Martijn van Oosterhout 2006-02-16 14:48:33 Re: qsort again (was Re: [PERFORM] Strange Create Index
Previous Message Jonah H. Harris 2006-02-16 14:19:44 Re: qsort again (was Re: [PERFORM] Strange Create Index

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Martijn van Oosterhout 2006-02-16 14:48:33 Re: qsort again (was Re: [PERFORM] Strange Create Index
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-02-16 14:41:08 Re: Generating config stuff from single source