Re: using a lot of maintenance_work_mem

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Devrim GÜNDÜZ <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, 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 15:08:38
Message-ID: 16274.1298214518@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> 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).

You seem to be confusing one limitation in one code path with the
overall meaning of maintenance_work_mem.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-02-20 15:21:18 Re: Update PostgreSQL shared memory usage table for 9.0?
Previous Message Bernd Helmle 2011-02-20 15:05:15 Re: using a lot of maintenance_work_mem