Re: Vacuum: allow usage of more than 1GB of work mem
От | Greg Stark |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Vacuum: allow usage of more than 1GB of work mem |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAM-w4HNcUmaez3sG7W+Xp9gZsCH5T7JFuhtSSi_-_A97VHv4ag@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Vacuum: allow usage of more than 1GB of work mem (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Vacuum: allow usage of more than 1GB of work mem
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 1:45 PM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 6 September 2016 at 19:59, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >> The idea of looking to the stats to *guess* about how many tuples are >> removable doesn't seem bad at all. But imagining that that's going to be >> exact is folly of the first magnitude. > > Yes. Bear in mind I had already referred to allowing +10% to be safe, > so I think we agree that a reasonably accurate, yet imprecise > calculation is possible in most cases. That would all be well and good if it weren't trivial to do what Robert suggested. This is just a large unsorted list that we need to iterate throught. Just allocate chunks of a few megabytes and when it's full allocate a new chunk and keep going. There's no need to get tricky with estimates and resizing and whatever. -- greg
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: