| From: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in |
| Cc: | <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Upgrade to dual processor machine? |
| Date: | 2002-11-13 13:20:43 |
| Message-ID: | 87k7jhvc5w.fsf@mailbox.samurai.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-performance |
"Shridhar Daithankar" <shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in> writes:
> 3) Sort mem is a tricky affair. AFAIU, it is used only when you create index or
> sort results of a query. If do these things seldomly, you can set this very low
> or default. For individual session that creates index, you can set the sort
> memory accordingly.
What would the benefit of this be? sort_mem is just an upper limit on
memory consumption, and that memory is only allocated on demand. So
there shouldn't be a difference between setting sort_mem globally to
some reasonable value, and manually changing it for backends that need
to do any sorting.
Cheers,
Neil
--
Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> || PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Shridhar Daithankar | 2002-11-13 13:25:06 | Re: Upgrade to dual processor machine? |
| Previous Message | Artur Rataj | 2002-11-13 12:47:46 | Comparing strings with non-ASCII characters |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Shridhar Daithankar | 2002-11-13 13:25:06 | Re: Upgrade to dual processor machine? |
| Previous Message | Henrik Steffen | 2002-11-13 12:00:18 | Re: Upgrade to dual processor machine? |