Re: [HACKERS] Effect of changing the value for PARALLEL_TUPLE_QUEUE_SIZE - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Effect of changing the value for PARALLEL_TUPLE_QUEUE_SIZE
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoYCCp7_NUVOzKqA9hR-nz4YWZpkkVPJPs1a=BDg8tvLrQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Effect of changing the value for PARALLEL_TUPLE_QUEUE_SIZE  (Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 2:35 AM, Ashutosh Bapat
<ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> AFAIK, work_mem comes from memory private to the process whereas this
> memory will come from the shared memory pool.

I don't think that really matters.  The point of limits like work_mem
is to avoid driving the machine into swap.  Allocating shared memory
might error out rather than causing swapping in some cases on some
systems, but any difference between private and shared memory is not
the real issue here.  The issue is overall memory consumption.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] TAP backpatching policy
Next
From: Mark Dilger
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Use of non-restart-safe storage by temp_tablespaces