From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] I've got it, now should I commit it? |
Date: | 1999-05-19 04:06:54 |
Message-ID: | 29091.927086814@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> A note for anyone testing the new code: the hashtable size (which is now
>> a target estimate, not a hard limit) is now driven by the postmaster's
>> -S switch, not the -B switch.
> I see no documenation that -B was ever used for hash size.
Er, did I say anything about documentation?
The code *was* using NBuffers to size the hashtable, whether or not
that was ever documented anywhere except in the "hash table out of
memory. Use -B parameter to increase buffers" message. Now it uses
the SortMem variable.
I do have it on my to-do list to update the relevant documentation.
(Yo, Thomas: what's the deadline for 6.5 doco changes? I've got a bunch
of doc to-dos that I suspect I'd better get moving on...)
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas Lockhart | 1999-05-19 04:12:18 | Re: [HACKERS] Current TODO list |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 1999-05-18 23:54:42 | Re: [HACKERS] I thought this was picked up ages ago? |