Andreas Kretschmer <akretsch...@spamfence.net> writes:
> Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Reid Thompson <reid.thomp...@ateb.com> writes:
>>> What am I missing that causes this to resort to sorting on disk?
>>
>> The in-memory space required to sort N tuples can be significantly
>> larger than the on-disk space,
> Question: when is the planner making the decision between in-memory and
> on-disk, at planning-time or at execution time with the knowledge about
> the real amount of tuples?
The planner doesn't make that decision. tuplesort.c always starts in
in-memory mode, and flips to on-disk when the actual amount of data in
its care exceeds work_mem. The planner guesses whether that will happen
while making cost estimates, but it's only an estimate.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
