Re: GIN data corruption bug(s) in 9.6devel - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Teodor Sigaev
Subject Re: GIN data corruption bug(s) in 9.6devel
Date
Msg-id 570D22A2.2090102@sigaev.ru
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: GIN data corruption bug(s) in 9.6devel  (Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
> This restricts the memory used by ordinary backends when doing the
> cleanup to be work_mem. Shouldn't we let them use
> maintenance_work_mem? Only one backend can be doing this clean up of a
> given index at any given time, so we don't need to worry about many
> concurrent allocations of maintenance_work_mem.  This seems very
> similar in spirit to index creation, where a backend is allowed to use
> maintenance_work_mem.
Because it could be a several indexes in one pg instance. And each cleaner could 
eat maintenance_work_mem.


>
> Also, do we plan on backpatching this?  While there are no known
Yes


-- 
Teodor Sigaev                                   E-mail: teodor@sigaev.ru
  WWW: http://www.sigaev.ru/
 



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Some other things about contrib/bloom and generic_xlog.c
Next
From: Justin Clift
Date:
Subject: Re: Lets (not) break all the things. Was: [pgsql-advocacy] 9.6 -> 10.0