| From: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Discarding relations from FSM |
| Date: | 2005-09-25 00:32:25 |
| Message-ID: | 20050925003225.GU7630@pervasive.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Sep 24, 2005 at 07:21:19PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Of course maybe a better question is why we even limit based on the
> > number of relations...
>
> Shared memory is fixed-size.
True, but can't the fixed memory required per-relation just be shared
with the fixed memory used to store free pages?
Though, the idea mentioned recently of just using one shared memory
segment for everything and allocating dynamically within that probably
makes more sense...
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2005-09-25 00:38:18 | Re: \d on database with a lot of tables is slow |
| Previous Message | Rod Taylor | 2005-09-25 00:20:47 | Re: \d on database with a lot of tables is slow |