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

From Peter Geoghegan
Subject Re: Auto-tuning work_mem and maintenance_work_mem
Date
Msg-id CAM3SWZSRuPYpAeU+LDPGQEH6HapHdK5K6uziUZwYObJHBxf6+w@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Auto-tuning work_mem and maintenance_work_mem  (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 10:21 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
>> Well, the Postgres defaults won't really change, because the default
>> vacuum_work_mem will be -1, which will have vacuum defer to
>> maintenance_work_mem. Under this scheme, vacuum only *prefers* to get
>> bound working memory size from vacuum_work_mem. If you don't like
>> vacuum_work_mem, you can just ignore it.

> While unrelated to the main topic of this thread, I think this is very
> important as well. I often have to advice people to remember to cap
> their maintenance_work_mem because of autovacuum, and to remember to
> re-tune maintenance_wokr_mem when they change the number of autovacuum
> workers.

I'll code that up at some point, then.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: Auto-tuning work_mem and maintenance_work_mem
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: dynamic shared memory: wherein I am punished for good intentions