From: | James Hunter <james(dot)hunter(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Proposal: "query_work_mem" GUC, to distribute working memory to the query's individual operators |
Date: | 2025-04-07 22:36:59 |
Message-ID: | CAJVSvF7HaSz=-b1g5BCUML17=SdjbYV+pSFHH9WuRfRCGScGRw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 5:47 PM James Hunter <james(dot)hunter(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Attaching a new revision, which substantially reworks the previous revision --
>
Attaching a rebased revision, with some minor changes.
Also, some context for why this change is especially useful for cloud
variants of PostgreSQL -- if you compare PostgreSQL guidance for
buffer pool size [1] to Amazon Aurora's [2], PostgreSQL recommends the
buffer pool to be sized to 25% of system memory, while Aurora
recommends it to be sized to ~ 70%. PostgreSQL explicitly relies on
the OS filesystem cache, effectively to extend the buffer pool; while
Aurora docs don't mention this at all.
Accordingly, Aurora PostgreSQL queries have less memory to work with
than ordinary PostgreSQL queries, making per-Node memory limits more
important.
Questions, comments?
Thanks,
James
[1] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/runtime-config-resource.html#GUC-SHARED-BUFFERS
[2] https://docs.aws.amazon.com/prescriptive-guidance/latest/tuning-postgresql-parameters/shared-buffers.html
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
0002-Add-workmem-estimates-to-Path-node-and-PlannedStmt.patch | application/octet-stream | 60.3 KB |
0004-Add-workmem_hook-to-allow-extensions-to-override-per.patch | application/octet-stream | 48.4 KB |
0001-Store-working-memory-limit-per-Plan-SubPlan-rather-t.patch | application/octet-stream | 54.1 KB |
0003-Add-EXPLAIN-work_mem-on-command-option.patch | application/octet-stream | 48.0 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2025-04-07 22:37:49 | Re: libpq maligning postgres stability |
Previous Message | Jacob Champion | 2025-04-07 22:26:47 | Re: [PoC] Federated Authn/z with OAUTHBEARER |