>Laurenz Albe <laurenz.a...@cybertec.at> writes: >> On Tue, 2020-03-17 at 19:57 +0000, Daniel Westermann (DWE) wrote: >> >>> >> is someone using temporary tablespaces on a RAM disk ? Any experiences >>> >> with that? >>> >> I did some quick tests and checked the archives but could not find any >>> >> information that either confirmed it is a bad idea nor the opposite. >>> >>> >Taking a step back, wouldn't it be better to increase "work_mem" >>> >and "temp_buffers" and set "temp_file_limit", so that temporary >>> >files are avoided whenever possible and temporary tables are cached? >>> >>> I don't think you can avoid that for all cases, especially when working >>> with large data sets. That was one of the reasons for my initial question. >> >> But with your proposed setup, any query that needs more temp space >> than your RAM disk has will fail. I don't think that is good for large >> data sets.
>Perhaps not, but disk filling on the same volume as WAL is also a >serious problem in case the process that eventually took the storage to >100% and got an ENoSpace was the WAL write :-) >Er, but any standard 1-tablespace configuration is at risk of that, >generally. Thank you all for your input. Regards Daniel
