On Apr 9, 2011, at 9:23 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: > Actually, Tom has a point in that work_mem can be set above 1GB (which > is where I had it set previously..). I didn't think it'd actually do > anything given the MaxAlloc limit, but suprisingly, it does (at least, > under 8.4). I'm currently trying to see if we've got anything that's > going to *break* with work_mem set up that high; right now I have a > hashagg plan running across this data set which has 2.4G allocted to > it so far. > > I'll update this thread with whatever I find out. I'm trying to > remember the other issues that I ran in to with this limit (beyond the > whole sort limit, which I do think would be helped by allowing a larger > value, but it's not as big a deal).
FWIW, I regularly set maintenance_work_mem to 8G for index builds. Presumably that's equivalent to running a sort in a regular query with work_mem set that high... -- Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect j...@nasby.net 512.569.9461 (cell) http://jim.nasby.net -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
