| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Qingqing Zhou" <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Automatically setting work_mem |
| Date: | 2006-03-17 20:18:14 |
| Message-ID: | 9732.1142626694@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
> Mind you, I'm also thinking that on enterprise installations with
> multi-department use of the database, the fact that work_mem is
> inalienably USERSET is also an allocation problem. One user with a SET
> command can blow all of your resource planning away.
One user with ability to enter arbitrary SQL commands can *always* blow
your resource planning away. Blaming such things on work_mem is
seriously misguided.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-03-17 20:27:36 | Re: Seperate command-line histories for seperate databases |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2006-03-17 19:16:02 | Re: Automatically setting work_mem |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hannu Krosing | 2006-03-17 21:07:37 | Re: Automatically setting work_mem |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2006-03-17 19:16:02 | Re: Automatically setting work_mem |