From: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Dimitrios Apostolou <jimis(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Add mention of execution time memory for enable_partitionwise_* GUCs |
Date: | 2024-07-18 10:03:40 |
Message-ID: | CAApHDvq4aeB2fGJPFohMDn=egBCmRYAeCjDV0mrDrrbm4DPKVQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 18 Jul 2024 at 21:24, Ashutosh Bapat
<ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> If those GUCs are enabled, the planner consumes large amount of memory
> and also takes longer irrespective of whether partitionwise plan is
> used or not. That's why the default is false. If majority of those
> joins use nested loop memory, or use index scans instead sorting,
> memory consumption won't be as large. Saying that it "can" result in
> large increase in execution memory is not accurate. But I agree that
> we need to mention the effect of work_mem on partitionwise
> join/aggregation.
hmm? please tell me what word other than "can" best describes
something that is possible to happen but does not always happen under
all circumstances.
David
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Nitin Motiani | 2024-07-18 10:17:26 | Re: long-standing data loss bug in initial sync of logical replication |
Previous Message | Nitin Motiani | 2024-07-18 10:00:41 | Re: long-standing data loss bug in initial sync of logical replication |