On Fri, 3 Nov 2023 at 13:49, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 09:03:52AM +0000, Hou, Zhijie wrote: > > /* > > * Don't set the limit below 3/4 of hash_mem. In that case, we are at > > the > > * minimum number of partitions, so we aren't going to dramatically > > exceed > > - * work mem anyway. > > + * hash_mem anyway. > > Can someone comment on this? Is the text change correct?
"work mem" is incorrect. I'd prefer it if we didn't talk about hash_mem as if it were a thing. It's work_mem * hash_mem_multiplier. Because of the underscore, using "hash_mem" to mean this makes it look like we're talking about a variable by that name. Maybe it would be better to refer to the variable name that's used to store the result of get_hash_memory_limit(), i.e. hash_mem_limit. "the limit" should likely use "*mem_limit" instead as there are multiple limits mentioned. It would also be better if this comment explained what's special about 4 * partition_mem. It seems to have nothing to do with the 3/4 mentioned in the comment. David
