Re: Idea about better configuration options for sort memory

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com> writes:
> >>> Hmmm ... maybe query_work_mem and maintenance_work_mem, or something 
> >>> similar?
> >> 
> >> I'll go with these unless someone has another proposal ...
> 
> > The only confusion is that you can use multiple query_work_mem per
> > query, but I can't think of a better name.
> 
> True.  Maybe just "work_mem" and "maintenance_work_mem"?
> 
> BTW, I am going to look at whether GUC can be persuaded to continue to
> allow "sort_mem" as an alternate name, if we rename it.  That would
> alleviate most of the backward-compatibility issues of changing such
> a well-known parameter name.

Good. It is not like we have a huge namespace limitation in there.  I
wonder if we could cost it as a list of string pointers, null
terminated.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073