Re: maintenance_work_mem = 64kB doesn't work for vacuum

From: David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: maintenance_work_mem = 64kB doesn't work for vacuum
Date: 2025-03-09 21:30:48
Message-ID: CAApHDvo8fb9MkfH7VPwg80=hjq64=ps6NaQ8SjoB7soYL-=iZg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 at 07:46, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> A simple fix is to bump the minimum maintenance_work_mem to 256kB. We
> would break the compatibility for backbranch (i.e. v17) but I guess
> it's unlikely that existing v17 users are using less than 1MB
> maintenance_work_mem (the release note doesn't mention the fact that
> we lowered the minimum value).

Could you do something similar to what's in hash_agg_check_limits()
where we check we've got at least 1 item before bailing before we've
used up the all the prescribed memory? That seems like a safer coding
practise as if in the future the minimum usage for a DSM segment goes
above 256KB, the bug comes back again.

David

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alexander Korotkov 2025-03-09 21:53:00 Re: pgsql: reindexdb: Add the index-level REINDEX with multiple jobs
Previous Message Oliver Ford 2025-03-09 20:07:33 Re: Add RESPECT/IGNORE NULLS and FROM FIRST/LAST options