Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
> Not that I've seen in testing so far. Your improvements have, fortunately,
> eliminated the penalty for allocating too much shared buffers as far as I can
> tell (at least, allocating 70,000 when gains stopped at 15,000 doesn't seem
> to carry a penalty),
Cool, that's definitely a step forward ;-)
> Regarding 2GB memory allocation, though, we *could* really use support for
> work_mem and maintenance_mem of > 2GB.
Again, let's see some evidence that it's worth putting effort into that.
(Offhand it seems this is probably an easier fix than changing the
shared-memory allocation code; but conventional wisdom is that really
large values of work_mem are a bad idea, and I'm not sure I see the case
for maintenance_work_mem above 2Gb either.)
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
