On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Pavan Deolasee
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 7:03 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 11:39 PM, Pavan Deolasee
>> <pavan.deola...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > But I actually wonder if we are over engineering things and
>> > overestimating
>> > cost of memmove etc. How about this simpler approach:
>> Don't forget that you need to handle the case where
>> maintenance_work_mem is quite small.
> How small? The default IIRC these days is 64MB and minimum is 1MB. I think
> we can do some special casing for very small values and ensure that things
> at the very least work and hopefully don't regress for them.
Sounds like you need to handle values as small as 1MB, then.
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org)
To make changes to your subscription: