Re: Auto-tuning work_mem and maintenance_work_mem - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Auto-tuning work_mem and maintenance_work_mem
Date
Msg-id 20131009211625.GD7092@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Auto-tuning work_mem and maintenance_work_mem  (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Oct  9, 2013 at 02:11:47PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 10/09/2013 01:37 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> > If Heroku could increase maintenace_work_mem without having it affect
> > the amount of memory used by autovacuum workers, I'm fairly confident
> > that our setting would be higher. Sure, you can just increase it as
> > you need to, but you have to know about it in the first place, which
> > is asking too much of many people tasked with semi-routine maintenance
> > tasks like creating indexes.
> 
> Personally, I never got why we used maint_work_mem instead of work_mem
> for bulk-loading indexes. What was the reason there?

Because 'maintenance' operations were rarer, so we figured we could use
more memory in those cases.

--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
 + Everyone has their own god. +



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Auto-tuning work_mem and maintenance_work_mem
Next
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: Patch: FORCE_NULL option for copy COPY in CSV mode