Horton

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

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Pavan Deolasee <pavan.deolasee@gmail.com>
Cc: Claudio Freire <klaussfreire@gmail.com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>, Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu>, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>, Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com>, PostgreSQL-Dev <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2016-09-16T13:33:12Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 11:39 PM, Pavan Deolasee
<pavan.deolasee@gmail.com> wrote:
> But I actually wonder if we are over engineering things and overestimating
> cost of memmove etc. How about this simpler approach:

Don't forget that you need to handle the case where
maintenance_work_mem is quite small.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Commits

  1. Prefetch blocks during lazy vacuum's truncation scan

  2. Explain unaccounted for space in pgstattuple.