| From: | "Ben Zeev, Lior" <lior(dot)ben-zeev(at)hp(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Atri Sharma <atri(dot)jiit(at)gmail(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL Process memory architecture |
| Date: | 2013-06-04 13:24:02 |
| Message-ID: | 59E5FDBE8F3B144F8FCF35819B39DD4C162485DF@G5W2716.americas.hpqcorp.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
No it isn't a typo,
All the tables are empty and all the indexes are empty
-----Original Message-----
From: Merlin Moncure [mailto:mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2013 16:10
To: Ben Zeev, Lior
Cc: Atri Sharma; Stephen Frost; Pg Hackers
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL Process memory architecture
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 12:57 AM, Ben Zeev, Lior <lior(dot)ben-zeev(at)hp(dot)com> wrote:
> No matter how I try to redesign the schema the indexes consume large
> amount of memory, About 8KB per index.
8KB per index -- is that a typo? that doesn't seem like a lot to me.
merlin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2013-06-04 13:45:17 | Re: Optimising Foreign Key checks |
| Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2013-06-04 13:09:48 | Re: PostgreSQL Process memory architecture |