Re: using a lot of maintenance_work_mem

From: Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Devrim GÜNDÜZ <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Frederik Ramm <frederik(at)remote(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: using a lot of maintenance_work_mem
Date: 2011-02-20 14:48:06
Message-ID: 8FEB44AF6599316421E487F7@amenophis
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

--On 20. Februar 2011 09:32:02 -0500 Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:

> Well, I figure it will be hard to allow larger maximums, but can we make
> the GUC variable maximums be more realistic? Right now it is
> MAX_KILOBYTES (INT_MAX).

This is something i proposed some time ago, too. At least, it will stop us
from promising something which is maintenance_work_mem not able to deliver.

--
Thanks

Bernd

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bernd Helmle 2011-02-20 15:05:15 Re: using a lot of maintenance_work_mem
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2011-02-20 14:41:49 Re: work_mem / maintenance_work_mem maximums