On Sat, Apr 30, 2016 at 12:19:02PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > Presumably due to the old issues with tuplesort, the closest the docs > get to recommending higher work_mem or maintenance_work_mem settings > is: "Larger [maintenance_work_mem] settings might improve performance > for vacuuming and for restoring database dumps". That's it! Since the > performance characteristics of external sorting are now roughly in > line with everything else, why continue to make such a weak statement > in 9.6? It's not hard to understand why we originally equivocated > here, but things have changed.
Yes, this needs updating. My point is that there is a whole lot of things we don't talk about in this area, and should, but I would like it to be of a consistent level of detail for all areas of performancce. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
