| From: | Ron Johnson <ron(dot)l(dot)johnson(at)cox(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: createing indexes on large tables and int8 |
| Date: | 2007-07-18 17:36:51 |
| Message-ID: | 469E4FB3.4010201@cox.net |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 07/17/07 17:12, mljv(at)planwerk6(dot)de wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 July 2007 17:47:01 Tom Lane wrote:
>> mljv(at)planwerk6(dot)de writes:
>>> i think i got it fixed as i saw that i pushed my maintenance_work_mem too
>>> high. It was higher than physical ram :-(
>> Ooops, that will definitely cause problems.
>
> yes it did! I ran it again. And now it takes 10 minutes per index instead of
> 10 hours (still 8.1). maybe something postgres should complain about if
> setting maintance_work_mem too high.
Unless it does some really OS-specific calls, *can* PostgreSQL know
how much *physical* RAM is in a box?
- --
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA USA
Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day.
Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFGnk+zS9HxQb37XmcRAsDtAKCCadB0CF8ATeHCtO79wcTD3lER7wCgttoF
E9Rndryd/IhZEP2FY7yIr/A=
=bDSf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Erik Peterson | 2007-07-18 18:25:29 | Re: Update of table lags execution of statement by >1 minute? |
| Previous Message | Roderick A. Anderson | 2007-07-18 17:27:03 | DBI/DBD::Pg and transactions |