Tom Lane wrote:
> Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
>>> Having said that, I'm not sure it'd help your problem. If your query is
>>> using more than 32 regexes concurrently, it likely is using $BIGNUM
>>> regexes concurrently. How do we fix that?
>
>> Hmmm. I think there's a lot of ground between 32 and $BIGNUM. For example,
>> where I'm hitting a wall is 300 regexes. Some quick testing on my opteron
>> text machine right now shows that the execution time difference between 20rx
>> and 50rx is around 20x.
>
> Hmm. Well, I still don't want to tie it to work_mem; how do you feel
> about a new GUC to determine the max number of cached REs?
Yeah. You know me, I was just trying to avoid having more GUCs.
--Josh
