Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > The real fix for this problem is probably to have the ability to > actually return memory to the shared pool, rather than having > everyone grab as they need it until there's no more and never give > back. But that's not going to happen in 9.1, so the question is > whether this is a sufficiently serious problem that we ought to > impose the proposed stopgap fix between now and whenever we do > that. There is a middle course between leaving the current approach of preallocating half the maximum size and leaving the other half up for grabs and the course Heikki proposes of making the maximum a hard limit. I submitted a patch to preallocate the maximum, so a request for a particular HTAB object will never get "out of shared memory" unless it is past its maximum: http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/4d948066020000250003c...@gw.wicourts.gov That would leave some extra which is factored into the calculations up for grabs, but each table would be guaranteed at least its maximum number of entries. This seems pretty safe to me, and not very invasive. We could always revisit in this 9.2 if that's not good enough. -Kevin
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
