Josh Berkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Having said that, I'm not sure it'd help your problem. If your query is
>> using more than 32 regexes concurrently, it likely is using $BIGNUM
>> regexes concurrently. How do we fix that?
> Hmmm. I think there's a lot of ground between 32 and $BIGNUM. For example,
> where I'm hitting a wall is 300 regexes. Some quick testing on my opteron
> text machine right now shows that the execution time difference between 20rx
> and 50rx is around 20x.
Hmm. Well, I still don't want to tie it to work_mem; how do you feel
about a new GUC to determine the max number of cached REs?
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
