"Luke Lonergan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I would only suggest that we replace the existing algorithm with one that
> will work regardless of (reasonable) memory requirements. Perhaps we can
> agree that at least 1MB of RAM for external sorting will always be available
> and proceed from there?
If you can sort indefinitely large amounts of data with 1MB work_mem,
go for it.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
