Yeah, although with 48GB of available memory and not that much concurrency, I'm not sure it matters that much. But point taken, I'll see about modifying the app such that work_mem gets set on a per-query basis.
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 11:24 PM, Scott Marlowe <scott.marl...@gmail.com>wrote: > On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 11:45 PM, Samuel Gendler > <sgend...@ideasculptor.com> wrote: > > Answered my own question. Cranking work_mem up to 350MB revealed that > > the in-memory sort requires more memory than the disk sort. > > Note that unless you run VERY few client connections, it's usually > better to leave work_mem somewhere in the 1 to 32Meg range and have > the connection or user or database that needs 350Meg be set there. > > I.e. > > <connect> > set work_mem='512MB'; > <execute query > > OR > > alter user memoryhog set work_mem='512MB'; > > OR > > alter database memhogdb set work_mem='512MB'; >
