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

From: John Naylor <johncnaylorls(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: 2025-03-10 01:23:49
Message-ID: CANWCAZaR_evWtizo63=bkuAaMPH+P=FMCaaqz0PC3rG6mzxw1Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 1:46 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Commit bbf668d66fbf6 (back-patched to v17) lowered the minimum
> maintenance_work_mem to 64kB, but it doesn't work for parallel vacuum

That was done in the first place to make a regression test for a bug
fix easier, but that test never got committed. In any case I found it
worked back in July:

https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CANWCAZZb7wd403wHQQUJZjkF%2BRWKAAa%2BWARP0Rj0EyMcfcdN9Q%40mail.gmail.com

--
John Naylor
Amazon Web Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Melanie Plageman 2025-03-10 01:45:21 Re: maintenance_work_mem = 64kB doesn't work for vacuum
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2025-03-10 01:19:16 Re: Query ID Calculation Fix for DISTINCT / ORDER BY and LIMIT / OFFSET