| From: | Jim Nasby <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> |
| Cc: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, John Cole <john(dot)cole(at)uai(dot)com>, "'pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org'" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Out of memory on vacuum analyze |
| Date: | 2007-02-22 23:32:45 |
| Message-ID: | 5982FDC4-A0A8-4A3B-98C1-D0FE9E55485D@decibel.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Feb 21, 2007, at 12:58 AM, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
> Have you actually measured a performance improvment going beyond
> 250-350MB(that seemed about to be the sweet spot last I tested) or so
> for index creation and friends ?
To be honest, no; I just set it high to play on the safe side. But I
have seen reports of large in-memory sorts actually being slower than
tape sorts in some cases, so I probably am leaving some performance
on the table.
--
Jim Nasby jim(at)nasby(dot)net
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Guido Neitzer | 2007-02-22 23:37:09 | Re: How would you handle updating an item and related stuff all at once? |
| Previous Message | Jim Nasby | 2007-02-22 23:27:47 | Re: postgresql vs mysql |