Re: [HACKERS] qsort again (was Re: [PERFORM] Strange Create Index behaviour)

2006-03-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:pgsql-hackers- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Lane Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 5:22 PM To: Ron Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [HACKERS] qsort again (was Re: [PERFORM

Re: [HACKERS] qsort again (was Re: [PERFORM] Strange Create Index behaviour)

2006-02-16 Thread Tom Lane
Gary Doades [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I think the reason I wasn't seeing performance issues with normal sort operations is because they use work_mem not maintenance_work_mem which was only set to 2048 anyway. Does that sound right? Very probable. Do you want to test the theory by jacking that

Re: [HACKERS] qsort again (was Re: [PERFORM] Strange Create Index behaviour)

2006-02-15 Thread Tom Lane
I wrote: Gary Doades [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ouch! That confirms my problem. I generated the random test case because it was easier than including the dump of my tables, but you can appreciate that tables 20 times the size are basically crippled when it comes to creating an index on