Re: Choice of bitmap scan over index scan

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: <mathieu(at)dezutter(dot)org>, "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
Cc: <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Choice of bitmap scan over index scan
Date: 2010-01-10 16:01:42
Message-ID: 4B49A586020000250002E142@gw.wicourts.gov
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

I wrote:

> work_mem = 32MB

Hmmm... With 100 connections and 2 GB RAM, that is probably on the
high side, at least if you sometimes use a lot of those connections
at the same time to run queries which might use sorts or hashes. It's
probably safer to go down to 16MB or even back to where you had it.

Sorry I missed that before.

-Kevin

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2010-01-10 18:45:32 Re: PG optimization question
Previous Message Kevin Grittner 2010-01-10 15:53:51 Re: Choice of bitmap scan over index scan