Re: Temporary tables and in-memory use

From: Marios Vodas <mvodas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Temporary tables and in-memory use
Date: 2011-09-29 17:30:22
Message-ID: 4E84AB2E.7040807@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Thank you. The setup is intended for one user environment for complex
queries and operations that's why I wrote 2GB temp_buffers!
Thank you again, I really appreciate it.
Marios

On 29/9/2011 7:55 μμ, Tom Lane wrote:
> Marios Vodas<mvodas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> If I'm not wrong, temporary tables stay in memory if they do not go over
>> temp_buffers limit (e.g. if temp_buffers is 2GB and the size of the table is
>> 300MB the table will remain in memory).
>> What if a column is variable length (e.g. text), how does this column stay
>> in-memory since it should be stored in TOAST?
> Well, the toast table is also temp, so it'll get cached in temp_buffers
> as well, as long as it fits.
>
>> When I build a GiST index on a temporary table does the index stay in memory
>> as well?
> Same answer.
>
> Keep in mind that temp_buffers is per process, not global. Just as with
> work_mem, you need to be careful about setting it sky-high.
>
> regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2011-09-29 17:40:45 Re: Displaying accumulated autovacuum cost
Previous Message Steve Crawford 2011-09-29 16:55:54 Re: pg_upgrade - add config directory setting