From: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andy Colson <andy(at)squeakycode(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: remove useless ccache searching |
Date: | 2011-09-05 18:47:31 |
Message-ID: | CAFj8pRB9NrQLN77dy-gyyp7S6Uf8+b-g1AwbUgNzty9Cz_TdxQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hello
2011/9/5 Andy Colson <andy(at)squeakycode(dot)net>:
> Pavel, I have not taken on your patch for review, but I was reading the
> history of it, and one question popped up:
>
> If you are allocating a new cache, what if the array is really big, will 1st
> cache + your cache get bigger than work_mem? (or are array op's not
> constrained by work_mem? Sorry, I have not used array's so not sure if
> there are memory limits on them)
this patch doesn't cache a array - it store only a 18 bytes more per
array variable - it doesn't depend on array size.
but generally, arrays are not limited by work_mem - so if you work
with large arrays - you can go out of memory.
Regards
Pavel
>
> -Andy
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2011-09-05 18:51:12 | Re: [GENERAL] pg_upgrade problem |
Previous Message | hubert depesz lubaczewski | 2011-09-05 18:44:11 | Re: [GENERAL] pg_upgrade problem |